This is the first ‘post tipping point’ post. It is about the absurd ‘Department of Homeland Security’, USVISIT and their true purposes; to control the united states population, and to intercept ‘criminals‘.

Like the Germans that they are emulating, uncle sham’s obsessive record keeping will come back to haunt them, and in twentieth century style, this haunting comes back in near real time.

Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) has a detailed analyses of precisely what ‘DHS’ has been doing, and as we and everyone else has been saying, it has nothing whatsoever to do with ‘terrorism’, and the numbers prove it.

Lets think about this.

If a huge amount of money was spent fighting a phantom menace, and then those people found (by doing the same statistical analysis that TRAC has done) that, actually, there is no terrorist threat at all then they would find themselves in a great dilemma. Firstly, none of them would have jobs if the DHS was found to be an unneeded knee jerk response to the mythical ‘911’. Secondly, it would be a huge embarrassment to the people who demanded that it be created. The second is less important than the first.

Now that this juggernaut has been created, it will be very difficult to shut it down. It has no real need to exist, other than to feed its employees and guarantee their pensions, to pay monies to contractors; to be a part of the ‘security ecosystem’ in which the citizen is the plankton and DHS, USVISIT etc are the baleen sporting monster whales.

In any other field of human activity, if something was not working correctly for the task it was designed to fulfill, it would be dismantled immediately lest it waste MORE money. But this is not about efficiency, common sense or anything else decent. It is about implementing the infrastructure of fascism in the united states.

And they are doing a very good job at it.

We read in today’s Guardian that (the) UK housing market has reached (a) tipping point.

There is a much more interesting tipping point that has been reached however.

This Blog, BLOGDIAL, as well as many other blogs (some of which are in our blogroll) have reached a tipping point; any time you read a story like the one below, one of our blogs has covered the story in detail previously, and at a much higher quality level than any national newspaper.

Take a look at the usual boring, insufficient, stylistically dead, threadbare, dim witted, one dimensional, stupid, dead-end, pointless and imagination-less dross in this piece:

Civil rights fears over DNA file for everyone

Campaigners say Whitehall wants even litter-droppers on crime database

Jamie Doward, home affairs editor
Sunday May 27, 2007
The Observer

Civil liberties groups are warning that the details of every Briton could soon be on the national DNA database, raising fresh concerns of a ‘surveillance society’. Controversial plans being studied by the government would see the DNA of people convicted of even the most minor, non-imprisonable offences, such as dropping litter, entered on the national database.

The proposals are part of a wide-ranging government review of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (Pace), which campaign groups warn may have profound ramifications for society. ‘The danger is that if we start adding the details of people convicted of these sort of minor offences to the database we’ll come to a tipping point,’ said Gareth Crossman, director of Liberty. ‘The government will say: “Actually it’s a bit unfair some people aren’t on the database; maybe everyone should be on it.”‘

The DNA database is already proving controversial with some politicians and police officers raising concerns about its use. Liberty claims that, per head of population, the UK has five times as many people on the DNA database as any other country. The government estimates that even if the database is not expanded to include the details of minor offenders, some 4.5 million people will still be on it by 2010.

[…]

Observer

and then do a google search for “Blogdial litter DNA” or “litter dna infowars” or “litter dna “police state” blogger” you are returned many posts, all of which outperform the Guardian/Observers drivel by any metric you care to apply.

So what does this mean? It means that the power of Bloggers and networked, intelligent writers needs to be applied. Thinking right off the keyboard, it probably means swarming of some kind, enabled by mobile devices (phones).

If we do not do this, what history will show is that we were like passengers on the Titanic who saw that the ship was sinking but who did not try to escape. We saw what was coming, did not avoid the ice berg, felt the crash, saw the water gushing in, and simply described what was happening eloquently as we all drowned.

No donning of life jackets.
No rowing away in life boats.
No Mayday signals.

And you can be sure that the captain and officers will not go down with the ship.

Even RATS know when to leave a sinking ship; if we do not act, galvanize and eventually destroy this emerging police state before it gets settled into place, those who cannot afford to escape will be VERY SORRY that they did not do something.

I used to often say, when speaking to people about Home Schooling, “would you pay £100 to restore the present situation and remove all the draconian measures HMG is proposing if they should be put into place?”. The answer is always an instantaneous ‘yes’, and yet, these same people are insanely reluctant to mount a professional pressure campaign because they don’t want to dip into their own pockets or ‘put their head above the parapet’.

I’m not making this up obviously.

This is the nature of the worst of the modern British; cowering, frightened, beaten down, fear soaked, gutless, in love with being stupid, hypnotized, and thick as shit. Even when you prove to them that something is worth doing, they cower away because of some illusory ‘thing’ that might come and get them. Its rather like the Shortwave Magazines that refused to publish logs of Numbers Stations for fear of ‘someone’ coming to their publication and doing ‘something’. Of course, that fear was totally unfounded, as are many of these self restricting fears; and the police state relies on the self control and automatic fear response of the public for the majority of its power. Think of it as a Sterling Engine of Control; the heat of your own body runs the engine that keeps you enslaved (check out that video of the Sterling engine running at the bottom of the page).

The Guardian is one of the worst criminals in the fight against the police state.

On the one hand, it wines in its very boring style about the erosion of civil liberties, and then in the very same paper, publishes opinions (that are total lies) that can only facilitate the establishment of a police state.

Take a look at this utter, unmitigated rubbish:

Should going to school be compulsory?

Interviews by Hester Lacey
Tuesday May 22, 2007
The Guardian

Angela Fuller
Teacher, Staffordshire

I considered educating one of my daughters at home. Home schooling offers relative freedom to construct an appropriate, non-Sats-driven curriculum, and sidesteps problems of bullying and peer pressure.

At the same time, I can see why there is concern. It encourages mutual over-dependence. Parent and child can suffer the sense of isolation that affects other home-workers. It is difficult to switch off and relax when home doubles as a classroom. Schools have facilities such as science labs, music centres and sports facilities that would not be available in a home setting. The deciding factor for me is the limited opportunity for a home-schooled child to socialise with peers. Do I think that going to school should be compulsory? No, but there had better be a darn good alternative.

Lie number one “It encourages mutual over-dependence”
Lie number two “Parent and child can suffer the sense of isolation”
Lie number three “It is difficult to switch off and relax when home doubles as a classroom”
Lie number four “The deciding factor for me is the limited opportunity for a home-schooled child to socialise”

There is a better alternative you IMBECILE, and as we have been saying, millions of people are taking advantage of it. Obviously ‘Hester Lacey’ knows nothing about home schooling, to the extent that she has never looked it up on the internets, otherwise, she would never let the ignorant ranting of someone who obviously knows NOTHING about home schooling to appear as an informed opinion.

Teachers are always rabidly anti-home schooling, because it is a direct threat to their personal status. People like this ‘Angela Fuller’ do not care about the welfare of children; if she did, and she saw that home schooled children outperform state schooled children in every way, she would endorse it because it is better for child, but instead she is against it because home schooling takes the meat from her machine, and diminishes her value as a person (in her mind).

This is like asking a cyclist if the congestion charge is a good thing or not. How utterly stupid.

Adam Alderson
Parent, Birmingham

I can’t think of a good reason why it shouldn’t be. Children who don’t go to school miss out on social interaction. Also, there’s the quality of teaching. Secondary school teachers are specialists in a range of subjects and you would have to be exceptional to cover all that. And there’s the discipline.

When you’re a parent, particularly in the early years, you wonder what your child is up to – it’s the first time they’ve been away from you for that length of time. Sometimes they will meet something they’re not happy with, but they have to face up to it, because they will meet adversities later on in life.

Lie number one “Children who don’t go to school miss out on social interaction”
Lie number two “Also, there’s the quality of teaching.”
SUPER LIE “And there’s the discipline.”

I have never read such ignorant, piss poor arguments against home schooling in all my trawls of the internets. The previous two people must have been scraped from the bottom of an street bums seven week old beer can filled with spit, insects and cigarette ends.

Anyone who would let this sort of drivel through their ‘editorial process’ is either ignorant, delusional or fanatically against home schooling….or all three.

Lindi An Edis
Aged 15, from Barnsley

I can see both sides. Going to school, you get the social skills you need, as well as the academic side. But for some people, going to school wouldn’t help them socially, and I can see why they wouldn’t want to go. If a child isn’t going to gain anything extra from school and is going to come home upset, it’s perfectly fine to be taught from home. School can have a negative side; there can be bad influences as well as good.

I can also see why some people would say school should be compulsory. If a parent isn’t qualified or doesn’t know enough about the subject, you won’t have the same start in life. I’m coming up to GCSEs and I’ve had a lot of input from my teachers: they mark your work, show you where you’ve gone wrong, and help you see the mistakes you might make in the exam.

A half lie “you get the social skills you need”
A clever lie “If a parent isn’t qualified or doesn’t know enough about the subject, you won’t have the same start in life.”
another clever lie “I’ve had a lot of input from my teachers: they mark your work, show you where you’ve gone wrong, and help you see the mistakes you might make in the exam.”

This one is a bit more clever than the other two; hers would be clever ‘Guardian level’ lies if she were not 15 years old; by saying that you won’t get the same start in life, implies that going to school puts you on a level playing field, which does not exist in this or any other Universe I’m afraid. Being 15 years old means that you probably would not know that. The other subtle misunderstanding implies that parents who home school do not mark the work of their children once again, a deep misunderstanding about the reality of home schooling, to be forgiven since the respondent is 15. What is totally unforgivable is using the words of an innocent 15 year old like this to make a cheap and nasty anti home schooling point.

Hester Lacey may intone that she was approaching the subject from three different angles ‘to present a balanced view’, but the fact is this is a BBQesqe propaganda technique, where different voices are presented, all from the same side or totally ignorant, that on the surface appear to be different and diverse, but which are in fact all on the same side; the side of the editorial prejudice.

[…]

Guardian Education Weekly

The fact of the matter is the Guardian is ostensibly against the police state, but then it is FOR compulsory schooling, which requires universal registration of all children for 100% compliance, the entry point for NIR, ID cards and the police state.

With friends like this, we do not need enemies.

The Guardian Education Weekly is an astonishingly ignorant part of the paper, run by people who clearly do not have the ability to educate themselves about the very subject that they are in charge of. If they were able to do this, simply by using the internets, they would never allow these bald faced lies to appear in their section.

They write as if the internets do not exist, and as if the outside world does not exist; only what they think in their office is real, which is why ‘home education means poor socialization’, when of course, the opposite is true. But then again, the Guardian is not about the truth, it is about ‘Guardian Truth®’, and whatever that is, it has nothing to do with liberty or anything that we believe in or that is real.

If there is a tipping point that needs to be reached, and quickly, it is that of the popular disgust with the emerging police state. If this tipping point is not reached before the tipping point of total control is reached, then all is lost.

Should ‘our’ tipping point come first, the police state and all of its apparatus will be demolished and permanently outlawed, out of fear of a vengeful violent and virtuous population that has simply had enough. Should ‘their’ tipping point be reached first, it will forever (or at least for a generation) prevent ‘ours’ from happening. There will then be a final brain drain from this country, where everyone with common sense, decency and a real human spirit will flee for their lives.

What will remain will be the weakest minded, least British population ever on this beautiful island. Britain will cease to exist, as all its best people will have escaped to places where real people still live and breathe. Britain is nothing without these people. And you know it.

And this country will be a tramp in a dingy concrete underpass, singing about this once great place as he is being kicked in by those remnants.

Or not…

The famous sandwich

Its not rocket science – just a simple mushroom sandwich! Although there’s nothing ordinary about the mushrooms that we use.

Each sandwich is prepared to order with lots of love and attention to detail. We use a selection of the fresh mushrooms from our stall and saute them for 4 minutes using some slightly salted butter and a smigin of garlic.

The crowd can hardly contain themselves as the sandwich is lightly seasoned and finished with delicious shavings of pecorino and garnished with a sprig of parsley and a drizzle of olive oil. Of course – all our sourdough bread, garlic, parsley and pecorino are bought each day from other traders in the market.

http://www.sporeboys.com

I am for it.®™

Some people don’t understand why we oppose a national ID card. “It’s just a piece of paper,” they say. “What does it matter?”

Historian and law professor Eric Muller of the University of North Carolina has been trying to find out exactly what happened to his great-uncle Leopold Muller, who was deported from his home in Germany in 1942 and never heard from again by those of his family who survived. Most likely, he was eventually murdered at the death camp called Belzec.

Recently, in the course of his research, Eric found his Uncle Leopold’s German national ID card. He also found his Uncle Leopold’s medals for his service in the German army in World War I, during which he lost the use of one arm. But his Kemmkarte identified him boldly on the cover as Jew, not a decorated war veteran. Perhaps that’s why he arrived at the “evacuation” center without his ID card:

The Jew Leopold Israel Müller … will be evacuated to the East on April 25, 1942. He alleges that on April 24, 1942, he lost the kennkarte that he formerly had in his possession…. Müller is therefore without identification papers.

Was the ID card “just a piece of paper” to the Nazis? Was it sufficient that they had the person they wanted in their custody, and would soon send him to his death? No. They immedietely sent the police to search his empty house, find his kennkarte, and dutifully forward it after him (although by the time it arrived, he had been sent on, presumably to his death). The card itself mattered. To “lose” the card was, perhaps, to escape the fatal consequences of the definition it imposed.

Eric tells the story much more eloquently than we could. But what we think is noteworthy in contemporary context is the importance the national ID card played in defining the individual, and involuntarily binding the actual person to the designation (in his case, “Jew”) at categorization imposed on him by the government.

We are people, entitled to define (and redefine) ourselves. We are not, and we should not be, “identified” solely by which pigeon-hole(s) a government decides to put us in.

Snarfed from Papers Please.

And I completely agree with the idea that no one has the right to define you, and then force you to to be identified only by a means imposed by the state.

There are millions of these stories, from all over the world…

No one in the UK can say that they were not warned.

Robert Verkaik, another computer illiterate drone for a dead tree merchant, a ‘law editor’, writes about Google. Quite why these people never get their screeds vetted by someone who understands the internets is beyond me….here we go:

Google, the world’s biggest search engine, is setting out to create the most comprehensive database of personal information ever assembled, one with the ability to tell people how to run their lives.

This is exaggeration. Being able to ASK FOR ADVICE is very different to being ‘told how to run your life’. That’s what HMG does.

In a mission statement that raises the spectre of an internet Big Brother to rival Orwellian visions of the state, Google has revealed details of how it intends to organise and control the world’s information.

Nonsense. Big Brother refers directly to TOTALITARIAN GOVERNMENT, of the kind being cooked up in the USUK. You DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE with Totalitarian Government, you DO have a choice not to use Google, or any of their related services, and you can still have complete use of the internets. Google can never ‘control the world’s information’ this is just an ignorant lie.

The company’s chief executive, Eric Schmidt, said during a visit to Britain this week: “The goal is to enable Google users to be able to ask the question such as ‘What shall I do tomorrow?’ and ‘What job shall I take?’.”

Sounds interesting; that is what this article should have been about, not a bunch of fear-mongering computer illiterate trash.

Speaking at a conference organised by Google, he said : “We are very early in the total information we have within Google. The algorithms [software] will get better and we will get better at personalisation.”

Google’s declaration of intent was publicised at the same time it emerged that the company had also invested £2m in a human genetics firm called 23andMe. The combination of genetic and internet profiling could prove a powerful tool in the battle for the greater understanding of the behaviour of an online service user.

Really? That sounds like a pretty wild proclamation! Instead of just taking your word for it, JACKASS, lets find out what its REALLY all about:

23andMe is a privately held company developing new ways to help you make sense of your own genetic information.

Even though your body contains trillions of copies of your genome, you’ve likely never read any of it. Our goal is to connect you to the 23 paired volumes of your own genetic blueprint (plus your mitochondrial DNA), bringing you personal insight into ancestry, genealogy, and inherited traits. By connecting you to others, we can also help put your genome into the larger context of human commonality and diversity.

Toward this goal, we are building on recent advances in DNA analysis technologies to enable broad, secure, and private access to trustworthy and accurate individual genetic information. Combined with educational and scientific resources with which to interpret and understand it, your genome will soon become personal in a whole new way.

Hmmm sounds very vague, and not at all threatening. What is FAR MORE CLEAR and ABSOLUTELY THREATENING, and HERE NOW, is the DNA database operated by the UK government, the biggest in the world, which violates millions of people who have done nothing wrong. How can you call Google sinister when they have nothing up and running, and FAIL to mention that the UK already runs an Orwellian and human rights violating Police State DNA database of its own RIGHT NOW?

If you are a brain dead, computer illiterate, dim-witted journalist, well, then its easy, and while you attack Google for something that they are only talking about, your own government is committing violations, in your name and with your money, that you fail to mention in this appropriate context.

You are pathetic.

Earlier this year Google’s competitor Yahoo unveiled its own search technology, known as Project Panama, which monitors internet visitors to its site to build a profile of their interests.

I wonder if the Independent uses Web Analytics to see what people are clicking on at their piss poor website?

Lets have a look shall we?

On the very page where this screed sits, there are four ads.

One of then was served by DOUBLECLICK, which is about to be bought by Google.

They also have a devices by OVERTURE (Yahoo Search Marketing).

ROTFL you can’t make this stuff up!

Clearly The Independent takes advantage of Web Analytics just like anyone else who has a website does; does this make The Independent evil? Of course it does not. What DOES make The Independent evil is that it spreads lies, FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) in order to sell newspapers.

THAT is what we call evil.

Privacy protection campaigners are concerned that the trend towards sophisticated internet tracking and the collating of a giant database represents a real threat, by stealth, to civil liberties.

I am sick and tired of these ‘Privacy protection campaigners’ who never offer any solutions and who do not write any software. We have never EVER been in such a powerful position when it comes to protecting our privacy, and if some of these people spent less time whining and more time contributing to projects that everyone can use to not only protect their privacy, but have more privacy than anyone who lived in the 20th century during the era of the telephone, we would all be in a less dangerous situation. That means educating people about the tools you can use to protect your privacy, contributing to these software and hardware projects, and less complaining and alarm bell ringing without action. Oh yes, they might even try using these tools themselvs. Liberty, for example, does not publish a PGP key. It makes you wonder doesn’t it?

That concern has been reinforced by Google’s $3.1bn bid for DoubleClick, a company that helps build a detailed picture of someone’s behaviour by combining its records of web searches with the information from DoubleClick’s “cookies”, the software it places on users’ machines to track which sites they visit.

HA HA HA!! ‘cookies’ in DOUBLE QUOTES.

The Independent has set SIX cookies on my machine, one of them from Hitbox, who do real time Web Analytics. You FAIL IT. Not only does The Independent use Web Analytics, they are so stupid, that they PAY for the service instead of using Google Analytics!

Advice to ALL newspapers in the UK; always call a geek to fact check these articles BEFORE you publish them. That way you will not look like TOTAL IDIOTS.

The Independent has now learnt that the body representing Europe’s data protection watchdogs has written to Google requesting more information about its information retention policy.

The multibillion-pound search engine has already said it plans to impose a limit on the period it keeps personal information.

Once again, the EU is bringing in or has brought in data retention legislation which is far more important and which should be noted in this section, because it is done COMPULSORILY whereas Google is VOLUNTARY and no one is compelled to use Google.

A spokesman for the Information Commissioner’s Office, the UK agency responsible for monitoring data legislation confirmed it had been part of the group of organisations, known as the Article 29 Working Group, which had written to Google.

It is understood the letter asked for more detail about Google’s policy on the retention of data. Google says it will respond to the Article 29 request next month when it publishes a full response on its website.

The Information Commissioner’s spokeswoman added: “I can’t say what was in it only that it was written in response to Google’s announcement that will hold information for no more than two years.”

YOU CANT MAKE THIS STUFF UP!!!!!

So, they wrote a letter, ostensibly on behalf of the citizens they represent, and CANNOT REVEAL THE CONTENTS OF THE LETTER.

I know who I trust more… GOOGLE. They do not hide what they are doing, unlike these people from ‘the Article 29 Working Group’ (who publish their docs in PDF format for the most part), one previous head of the group being Göran Persson no experience in computers whatsoever. The current head, Peter Schaar is at least qualified; what a pity he does not subscribe to openness! At least there is someone in there who knows what they are talking about. Sadly my german (and my time) are limited, otherwise, I would hunt down the rest of this committee.

Ross Anderson, professor of Security Engineering at Cambridge University and chairman of the Foundation for Information Policy Research, said there was a real issue with “lock in” where Google customers find it hard to extricate themselves from the search engine because of the interdependent linkage with other Google services, such as iGoogle, Gmail and YouTube. He also said internet users could no longer effectively protect their anonymity as the data left a key signature.

I subscribe to FIPR, and paid for that subscription.

Ross is wrong about this. Cambridge University should have a huge software development programme, where they release useful tools under the GPL, and contribute to existing tools to help protect people’s privacy.

It is absolutely useless to complain about iGoogle. Anyone can create tools for the Web. Writely was bought by google. It was written by some coders because they had a cool idea. If you think that Google being in charge of everyone’s docs is a bad thing, then you should organize your own tools that has strict privacy policies in place that protect the user, release it for free under the auspices of the University, and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

It has never been easier to create these tools, and it has never been easier to deploy them. There is no excuse anymore. We can have privacy if we want it, and companies having plans that we object to doesn’t mean that we have to put up with them. We can make our own tools, release them and supplant Google. YouTube did this; they utterly demolished Google Video, and there were only a few of them that put it together. Google itself destroyed InfoSeek and the other first generation search engines. Recent history makes this perfectly clear; we do not have to put up with any objectionable services, and there is no company so big that it cannot be beaten by a few geeks with some free software.

“A lot of people are upset by some of this. Why should an angst-ridden teenager who subscribes to MySpace have their information dragged up 30 years later when they go for a job as say editor of the Financial Times?

I have written about this before; in the future, everyone will agree that what happened in the past is the past. This is the only way that we will be able to live in a world where people leave (either willingly or unwillingly) details of their past thoughts and actions available for all to see. Everyone will understand that, “what I say NOW is what matters, nothing else”.

But there are serious privacy issues as well. Under data protection laws, you can’t take information, that may have been given incidentally, and use it for another purpose. The precise type and size of this problem is yet to be determined and will change as Google’s business changes.”

Once again, the UK is trying to dismantle these laws; THAT is far more important and horrifying than an unexecuted PLAN from Google, and if the UK dismantles its data protection laws, does that mean that Google will be excluded from taking advantage of the changes? In any case, all Google have to do is change their terms of service to allow them to use your data in the ways that they need to; you can then decline if you so choose. Compare and contrast this with the policiy of the UK, where you have NO CHOICE TO REFUSE. Take for example your NHS medical records; they are the property of the Secretary of State, and before you can get them removed from your doctors computer, you have to have permission from The Secretary of State. With Google, if you want to delete your account and all the private, personal, sensitive and confidential data you have put there, all you have to do is close your account, and its all deleted permanently.

Which one is sinister to you?

A spokeswoman for the Information Commissioner said that because of the voluntary nature of the information being targeted, the Information Commission had no plans to take any action against the databases.

At last, some common sense.

Peter Fleischer, Google’s global privacy Ccunsel, said the company intended only doing what its customers wanted it to do.

Unlike the murdering government of Bliar, that ignores the wishes of the electorate every single time.

He said Mr Schmidt was talking about products such as iGoogle, where users volunteer to let Google use their web histories. “This is about personalised searches, where our goal is to use information to provide the best possible search for the user. If the user doesn’t want information held by us, then that’s fine. We are not trying to build a giant library of personalised information. All we are doing is trying to make the best computer guess of what it is you are searching for.”

Simple. Too simple for the fear-mongers and jackasses of this world.

Privacy protection experts have argued that law enforcement agents – in certain circumstances – can compel search engines and internet service providers to surrender information. One said: “The danger here is that it doesn’t matter what search engines say their policy is because it can be overridden by national laws.”

[…]

The Independent (a VERY STUPID newspaper)

Then by all means, write a big article about that, which is a clear abuse, and don’t shoot the people who are merely trying to give you a useful service FOR FREE!

You ungrateful SWINE!

I recently built a new box to serve all my music and movies. It running Ubuntu Feisty Fawn, with all the ‘Silent Bells and Whistles^®™‘: 1.2TB of disk space (western digital, 400, 400, 300), Intel Pentium E6300 1.86ghz core 2 duo, new style patented Zalman CNPS9700 LED figure of 8 copper CPU fan with blue led, ABit IB9 motherboard, 1gig OCZ DDR2 high speed memory, DVDR, CDR, Zalman Fatal1ty Champ1on case, Asus EN7600GS Silent Nvidia display card, Antex Truepower power supply.

I have dumped Fedora permanently…its just not worth the hassle. I have transfered all of the data from my legacy drives that were on NTFS and FAT, so we are now 100% Microsoft free.

Which brings us to the recent M$ FUD about Linux infringing 200+ M$ owned patents.

It is, of course, utter bullshit.

We all remember Darl McBride and the baseless attacks on the license under which you are free to use Linux. For months SCO refused to show the sections of the source that it claimed were infringed.

Now Microsoft is claiming that patents it owns are being infringed by Linux, but like SCO, it will not list which patents are being infringed. Microsoft is so terrified of distributions like Ubuntu that they are resorting to these infantile and pathetic tactics to try and scare people off of dumping their bloated garbage for Stuff That Actually Works®. Dell is now shipping Ubuntu. This means that it wont be long before they stop selling computers with Vista; why should they ship Vista when they can deliver a superior product that costs them nothing, and which enhances their hardware offerings far more than Vista does?

Eventually they will build a team that customizes Ubuntu with their own branding. It is a perfect solution for them. Microsoft are in a blind panic over this, which is why they have put out this nonsense media attack instead of going straight to court with the facts.

It has to be pointed out also that even if they did go to court and demonstrate that indeed, Linux distributions infringe, say, their patent on notifying when the other person is typing in an instant message session, these insane and bogus patents only have force in the USA. The EU doesn’t recognize software patents; that means that every linux distro can distribute a fully working OS that doesn’t infringe on the 235 M$ patents but which has an installer that retrieves the missing parts of the OS from servers in the free world. Ubuntu already does this in a seamless and effort free way for codecs that are illegal to distribute in a Linux OS in the USA.

There is now nothing that Microsoft can do about the explosive spread of Desktop Linux. They should have done what they always used to do; ‘embrace and extend‘. If they had rolled their own distribution they would now control the perception of Linux. All desktops in the world would run MS Linux (or Redmond Linux) and they would then be able to sell Office and other proprietary binaries to the punters on their own brand of Linux. Now, they cannot do this. It is too late for them to dump Vista and change tactics…or is it? They could easily offer their own badged versions of Ubuntu and Open office, and then sell them just like they sell their junk OS Vista. What is for certain, is that the tactics they are using now will not stop the march of the penguins. It will only make things worse for them.

Bill Gates is often called a generous philanthropist. This is actually not the case. When you give away something that you have in abundance, in this case, money, it has no real meaning in terms of generosity. Money for Gates has no value. He is giving away literally nothing, since his money has no value to him.

If he were a true philanthropist, if he were truly generous, and was making a true sacrifice, he would give away his dominance of the desktop for the good of humanity, since every M$ OS since Winblows 3.1 has been a menace to society. By adopting Linux, The Cathedral and the Bazaar Open Source and the Gnu Public License he would be actually performing an act of sacrifice, and helping the world by giving away something that means everything to him – power.

This does not mean that Microsoft would stop making money; indeed there is no reason to suppose that they would not be able to maintain their profitability; they can still sell Office and all their other gunk, only it would all run on a stable platform instead of bloated garbage. Its a no brainer. They would also be able to steer the way the Linux world works by contributing code. The fact of the matter is, corporate types are as thick as shit, and they would rather buy Linux from M$ than take Ubuntu for free. M$ would be able to maintain their position, neutralize the linux threat, take advantage of ‘owning’ a better OS…its pretty obvious.

But I digress.

Gates is no generous Philanthropist, that is for sure, and it doesn’t matter how much money he gives away or what it is worth to other people. His actions in this pathetic patent infringement threat show what his true nature is; venal, evil and against humanity, and no amount of good works will balance this out.

If you run Linux, or get your email from a server that runs Linux, you should sign up to be sued by Microsoft:

Why I am offering to be sued

I believe that Microsoft is hurting competition on the desktop, which affects me directly as a consumer of desktop software. I believe it is for the good of society for Microsoft’s patent claims to be tested in a court of law. If Microsoft wins, then so be it. If Microsoft loses, then the rest of us can get on with creating innovative business models for desktop software. I am not challenging Microsoft this way because I hate Microsoft. I don’t admire their software, nor do I admire their business models, but I am not challenging them because I want to sink their ship or damage their business or harm their reputation. I am really only interested in seeing whether their claims have any merit, which I think is probably not the case.

The other reason that I am offering to be sued and encouraging others to offer to be sued is that we will have the chance to show the world how many people really use Free Open Source Software directly on the desktop. Of course, all of us use Free Open Source Software when we use Google or YouTube or Wikipedia or Yahoo or the Internet Archive, because all of these companies use Free Open Source Software as an important part of delivering their services. And if Microsoft’s threat just hangs like a dark cloud over all that innovation, we will all be the worse off for it. But I am talking about us uniting on one list to show the world how many institutions and individuals use Free Open Source Software.

Maybe this list will never go anywhere. On the other hand, it will be fun to try!

So c’mon, Microsoft. If I infringed your patents, show me. After all, I am one of the members of a distributed team of film makers who is trying to document the real world digital tipping point that is probably pushing you to rattle the litigation saber anyway, and I am attempting to use all Free Open Source Software tools to do so. If you can shut me up, all the better for you!

And that is why.

Push towards pay-as-you-go roads
The government is pushing ahead with plans to introduce road pricing schemes in England and Wales despite a huge public campaign against them.

It has published a draft bill updating the rules for local authorities who want to set up charging trials.

It insists there are no plans yet for a national scheme but critics say it is not being open about its intentions.

A petition against road pricing on the Downing Street website received nearly two million online signatories.

Widespread road pricing is at least 10 years away technically – but 10 local authorities have expressed an interest in developing smaller-scale charging systems in their areas, which could be up and running within five years.

‘No decision’

The draft Local Transport Bill will give councils more flexibility to match road pricing schemes to local conditions, while ensuring they remain compatible with schemes in other areas.

KEY POINTS OF DRAFT BILL
Update existing powers so councils can propose local road pricing schemes
Any scheme expected to be part of anti-congestion plan and to fit in with those run elsewhere
Councils to bring in “quality contracts” to specify companies’ bus routes, timetables and fares
Reform passenger transport authorities in major towns outside London to enable a “more coherent” approach

But a Department for Transport spokesman said this did not mean the government was pressing ahead with a national pay-as-you-drive scheme.

“No decision has been made on a national scheme. We have got to see the results of the pilot schemes,” he said.

He said there would be a three-month consultation period for those in favour and against road pricing to have their say before a final bill is drawn up.

[…]

BBQ

And so, as many people have told you, including me, these petitions are nothing more than simple steam valves to allow the weak minded to let off steam. The murderers Bliar and Brown do not care about what you think, on any level. They use these phoney tricks to lull you into a false sense of participating in democracy. It is a sham and lie like everything else about them.

Now, The Prime Minister in Waiting has a chance to differentiate himself from Bliar:

Gordon Brown, BACK DOWN!

Cancel this universally unwanted road pricing scheme and DEMONSTRATE that you are different from your War Criminal cohort.

My emphases in the nested blockquote above; if these mini schemes ‘to fit in with those run elsewhere’ it means that when there are many of them, you can join them all up into a gigantic system, by which time there will be a de-facto national system.

Very smart, very sneaky.

It also means data-sharing across all of them obviously.

Bad Mojo!

General Jack D. Ripper:
Mandrake, do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, why, there are studies underway to fluoridate salt, flour, fruit juices, soup, sugar, milk… ice cream. Ice cream, Mandrake, children’s ice cream.
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake:
Lord, Jack.
General Jack D. Ripper:
You know when fluoridation first began?
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake:
I… no, no. I don’t, Jack.
General Jack D. Ripper:
Nineteen hundred and forty-six. Nineteen forty-six, Mandrake. How does that coincide with your post-war Commie conspiracy, huh? It’s incredibly obvious, isn’t it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That’s the way your hard-core Commie works.

And now we have the prospect of mandatory addition of folic acid to bread and flour. The supposed reasoning behind this is the prevention of neural deficiencies in new born children, however if we look at spina bifida the incidence rate is currently 0.15 per 1000 and if my browsing is correct with a birth rate of 700,000 per year that gives 105 children per year affected which is unfortunate but hardly worth a programme which indiscriminantly affects the whole population and with a ‘dosage’ that cannot be checked. We do not ban vehicles for the larger number of deaths and injuries caused by drivers, there are road safety campaigns, likewise pregnant women should be told about supplementary levels of folic acid intake.

Aside from this there is the matter of ignoring the right of people to eat unadulterated food, certainly in the case of flours I would imagine that most people making their own food have enough basic knowledge to maintain a balanced diet with as much folic acid as would be provided with a mass fortification programme.

It is your right to be able to buy unadulterated food and that is what the Food Standards Agency should be enforcing it should not be in the business of medication or anything else.

Secret plans to turn staff into STASI informers
Francis Elliott, Chief Political Correspondent

Council workers, charity staff and doctors will be required to tip off STASI about anyone whom they believe could commit a violent crime, under secret Home Office plans.

Civil liberties campaigners last night said that the proposal raised the prospect of people being placed under surveillance and detained even though they have committed no offence.

And a senior Kremlin official, who leaked the plans to Pravda, said that it would entail a mass of personal information, including sensitive medical records, being passed around many different agencies — even if there was no firm evidence of any potential risk from an individual.

The draft set of proposals on “multi-agency information sharing” was circulated around The Kremlin by Simon King, head of the violent crime unit at The Kremlin. The document states: “Public bodies will have access to valuable information about people at risk of becoming either perpetrators or victims of serious violence. Professionals will obviously alert STASI or other relevant authority if they have good reason to believe [an] act of serious violence is about to be committed. However, our proposal goes beyond that, and is that, when they become sufficiently concerned about an individual, they must consider initial risk assessment of risk to/from that person, and refer [the] case to [a] multi-agency body.”

It suggests that two new agencies — one for potential criminals, the other for potential victims — might be created to collate reports from the front line and carry out “full risk assessments”. But the draft does not spell out what action could then be taken to head off violent attacks.

Mr King admits that a number of issues need to be resolved, including what should trigger an initial report and what should count as a serious violent crime. He also says that laws would have to be created to place frontline staff under a statutory duty to alert STASI to the potentially violent. Currently those working with the public do not have such a duty, even if they believe that a crime is imminent.

Jago Russell, Policy Officer at the Liberty campaign group, said: “These proposals leave too many questions unanswered. What does The Kremlin propose to do with the people who have committed no crime but who fit a worrying profile? How far are we willing to go in pursuit of the unrealistic promise of a ‘risk-free society’?”

Danger signs used to identify an individual as a potential perpetrator might include a violent family background, heavy drinking or mental health problems. A potential victim might come to the attention of the monitoring agency on seeking treatment for stress-related conditions from a GP.

Supporters of the plans say that they would build on existing local arrangements that are already helping to head off domestic violence before it happens. It is claimed that better information-sharing might have prevented the Peredelkino murders.

Ian Huntley had been the subject of complaints of violence, a fact that had not been passed on to the authorities in Vladivostok, where he became a school caretaker.

Both the Huntley case and the death of Victoria Climbié, 9, who was killed despite repeated warnings to social service staff, kick-started efforts to pool personal information held across different agencies.

However, the latest plan goes beyond anything so far proposed. It would require primary legislation to make local authorities, STASI, GPs and other frontline workers share information on potential perpetrators or victims of serious violence among themselves.

The leaked draft suggests that existing Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships “could be well placed to manage and co-ordinate this work”.

However, some senior Kremlin officials are concerned at what they consider to be a significant extension of information-gathering which will, in any case, be ineffective. There are concerns too, that the system could be used to spread malicious smears.

More controversial still are the issues of where information on members of the public judged “at risk” should be kept and for how long.

David Davis, the Shadow Kremlin Securitat Officer, said: “Do our STASI not already have a difficult enough administrative burden without requiring them to wade through file after file of speculation and guess-work? And do we not already have enough of a surveillance society without recruiting council staff and charity volunteers to snoop on their customers?”

Dominic Grieve said that he could see little benefit in the scheme. “The proposals look as if they would set up a system of great complexity with absolutely no evidence that it could deliver results.”

A Kremlin spokesman said last night: “It is not our general practice to comment on leaked documents. However, The Kremlin has its duty of public protection as its top priority. These proposals are still in development and no decisions have been made.”

[…]

The Times

Not perfectly substituted, but you get the idea.

‘no decisions have been made’? How can you even be considering this insanity you animals?

And of course…

It suggests that two new agencies — one for potential criminals, the other for potential victims — might be created

Pre Crime!

‘Orwellian’ CCTV in shires alarms senior police officer

· Benefits of wide-ranging surveillance questioned
· Deputy chief constable criticises DNA rules

Rachel Williams
Monday May 21, 2007
The Guardian

Britain risks becoming an “Orwellian” society as CCTV cameras spread to quiet villages with low crime levels, a senior police officer warned yesterday.

Ian Readhead, Hampshire’s deputy chief constable, said he did not want to live in a country where every street corner was fitted with surveillance devices.

And so, at long last, the penny drops.

Even THE POLICE in Britain do not want to live in a country that is a Police State.

You cannot make this stuff up.

He also criticised rules which meant DNA evidence and fingerprints could be kept for the rest of a teenager’s life once they have been arrested for an offence, even if they never get in trouble again, and said there was a danger that speed cameras were seen by the public as a revenue-generating process rather than a genuine effort to reduce casualties.

Everyone deserves a second chance. A country where everything you do is forever marked down against your ‘record’ is not a fit place for human beings. Even the Police, the group that supposedly all of this is being set up to aid, are against it.

What took them so long to come out and SAY ALL OF THIS?!

Mr Readhead highlighted the town of Stockbridge in Hampshire’s rural Test Valley, where parish councillors spent £10,000 installing CCTV, as an example of a situation where the benefits of surveillance were questionable.

Crime went up slightly in the town after the system was installed, Mr Readhead said, although between 2005 and 2006 there were only two violent crimes against people over 60 and no one was injured in either incident. “I have to question: does the camera actually instill in individuals a great feeling of safety and does it present serious offences taking place?” he said in an interview for the BBC’s Politics Show.

Like most people in the UK, these councillors are in the grip of a feverish mania; ‘Security Madness’. They have no understanding of security, what the difference between real security and Security Theatre is. They also clearly have no understanding of what a free country is, and do not value Britain for the country that it has been for generations.

There are plenty of these thick people about sadly, they all speak with the same type of voice, hold the same ignorant opinions and they all have the vote. Sadly.

“I’m struggling with seeing the deployment of cameras in our local village as being a benefit to policing; I understand why the local public say this is what we want, but I’m really concerned about what happens to the product of these cameras, and what comes next? If it’s in our villages – are we really moving towards an Orwellian situation with cameras on every street corner? I really don’t think that’s the kind of country that I want to live in.”

Bravo, at last.

Stockbridge parish council yesterday defended its decision to install CCTV, with its former chairman revealing that police and traders had each contributed £4,000 to the cost of installing the three surveillance cameras in the town.

David Baseley, who was parish council chairman for the past nine years, said he was amazed by Mr Readhead’s comments. “I think a lot of police would disagree with him, the police have paid for some of it and the police have been behind it,” he said. “We were concerned about the vulnerability of the place, although we haven’t had any real crimes.”

The weather used to be the mainstay of conversations in this great country, now, it is ‘security’. ‘Security’ and ‘Health and Safety’ permeate every thought and every corner of everything and every place, to the extent that you cannot even cook food because of “Health and Safety”.

This nauseating mania for everything to be rendered harmless, for every possible eventuality to be covered, to prevent all accidents, no matter what the cost is un-British, inhuman and TOTALLY INSANE.

There are an estimated 4.2m CCTV cameras in the UK.

Not for long there are.

On the retention of DNA evidence, Mr Readhead said: “My concern is this – we are in a society at the moment where the police have the power that if they arrest a 15-year-old for a recordable offence we can retain their DNA and their fingerprints.

“That information would be kept for life unless there were exceptional circumstances, such as it being proved that no crime was committed.

“My real worry is this. Fifteen years from now we are still holding that DNA and that arrest information – should we be doing that?” Mr Readhead asked. “Is it right that that may impede that person – who’s never been arrested again – from getting a job? I’m not sure that sits comfortably with me.”

Well, the question that comes next is, “WHat are you going to do about it Mr. Readhead?”.

Shami Chakrabarti, director of the human rights group Liberty, welcomed Mr Readhead’s comments: “Politicians like to present the police as ever hungry for more powers. Yet even the police are concerned that we are losing the value of privacy.”

The Police Federation’s vice-chairman, Alan Gordon, said he shared some of the concerns about the extent of CCTV use. “I have sympathy with members of the public who are not going to be committing crimes and feel they are being spied on. It should be down to consultation with people locally,” he said.

No it should not you imbecile.

The public spaces should not be surveilled, full stop. Surveillance does not prevent crime. In the many decades before the mania for ‘Security’ the crime rate in the UK was very much lower than it is today.

The causes of crime must be addressed. The Surveillance system must be dismantled, because it has destroyed the quality of life that we have in the UK.

Profile: Stockbridge

Stockbridge’s wide high street has its roots in the ancient market town’s position on a drovers’ road that was once one of the south’s main east-west routes. Some 200 years later it was that same hub-like position – now the junction of the A30, A3057 and A3049 – that helped convince traders, fearful of outsiders raiding their shops and making a swift escape towards Salisbury, Andover, Winchester or Romsey, that they needed a CCTV system. The high street, with its tourist-friendly groceries, tea rooms, and antique shops, rarely suffers from yobbish youths loitering outside convenience stores.

The little crime there is consists largely of break-ins, and in 2004 the chamber of trade, police and local figures stumped up for three cameras. They have not led to any arrests, and crime has not been eradicated. Thieves broke into the Vine Inn in October to take cash from a fruit machine, and across the road the Co-op was targeted twice in a year. […]

Guardian

And there you have it.

Gordon Brown, BACK DOWN!

Cancel the NIR.
Remove all CCTV from public spaces.
Return to non Biometric Passports.
Cancel the ID Cards scheme.
Repeal all Orwellian Blair era legislation.
Remove all Speed Cameras.
Dismantle the Congestion Charging system in London.

and by all means, you can add to this list yourself.

UFO Disclosure – The Harsh Reality
by Patrick Cooke 

On May 9, 2001, Dr. Steven Greer of The Disclosure Project paraded a convincing cast of military and government witnesses before cameras at the National Press Club in Washington, DC. And then……nothing. Almost 6 years of non-disclosure about why it never went beyond that single press conference, even though it was the brightest “flash in the pan” the UFO movement had experienced.

Almost immediately, Greer set up a corporation dedicated to finding the elusive technology to provide the world’s energy needs with “alien technology”. He put all his efforts into that, and all we ever got was a video to remember the hope the press conference generated. The hope that, finally, we might get some answers from the government went the way of most alternatives to mainstream thought; it got sold.

Even though very little has been done, not withstanding the efforts of Steven Basset and a few others to force government disclosure, something recently, almost out of the ether, seems to have generated that governmental UFO disclosure so important to the credibility of the entire UFO movement. And, interest in UFOs has spread from the generally ignored paranormal and UFO “community” to the mainstream media. Suddenly, the justified fear of ridicule connected with reporting UFO sightings is fading and acceptance by the mainstream is increasing.

Recent Disclosure History

The best remembered UFO disclosure event to occur, which remains one of the largest “elephant in the room” in the UFO field, was Project Blue Book in 1969 that was undertaken by the United States Air Force. It was officially discontinued with the Air force citing the reason that UFOs did not present any threat to national security. It should be noted that this was not a denial of existence.

We do not need to go back hundreds or thousands of years to find clues to the current interest in UFOs; a decade will suffice.

• March 1997 – The Phoenix Lights event garnered the widest international attention of any UFO encounter in modern history in March 13, 1997. Less than two years later, in
• January 1999 – Joe Firmage, a Silicon Valley CEO turned UFO evangelist, posted his a 700-page UFO manifesto, “The Truth”.
• May 2001 – The Disclosure Project National Press Club event mentioned above took place, and Stephen Bassett took up the cause of UFO disclosure in his independent candidacy in the 8th Congressional District of the State of Maryland. (N.B. look at these testimonials on YouTube)
• May, 2004 The Mexican Department of Defense released videos of a sighting of multiple UFOs taken by an Air Force Merlín C26A, virtually admitting that UFOs exist.
• July, 2004 – Governor of New Mexico and presidential candidate, Bill Richardson, stated, “It would help everyone if the U.S. government disclosed everything it knows.”
• February, 2005 “Peter Jennings Reporting: UFOs — Seeing Is Believing” (N.B. a VERY shitty documentary. A much better one is ‘UFOs are Real‘ or ‘Out of the Blue‘)
• May, 2005 – A year after the Mexican DoD released its videos, the Brazilian Air Force (FAB) releases all its files on UFO contacts.
• September 2005 – Paul Hellyer, Canada’s Defence Minister, publicly stated, “UFOs, are as real as the airplanes that fly over your head.”
• April 2006 the Paradigm Clock, which tracks proximity to a formal acknowledgement of an extraterrestrial presence engaging the human race, was reset to 11:59:45, just 15 seconds to midnight.
• November 2006 – A significant sighting took place at O’Hare Airport in Chicago and received worldwide attention and media coverage.
• February 2007 The Chilean Army discloses recordings and secret contacts with UFOs before over a thousand attendees at the 10th International UFO Congress.
• March 2007 – The French national space agency, CNES, placed 1600 previously classified UFO sighting reports into the public domain on the Internet.
• March 2007 – Former Arizona governor, Fife Symington, revealed that he had seen a massive black triangular UFO fly overhead early in the evening of March 17, 1997 – the first Phoenix Lights event.
• April 2007 – The proposed “U.N. Decade Of Contact” to establish diplomatic relations with advanced E.T.s petition is well on its way to reaching its goal for submission to the United Nations.

Of the 14 major events listed above, which are moving UFO disclosure closer to reality, 11 have occurred in the last 24 months. This indicates that the mainstream is moving rapidly toward an acceptance of the greatest revelation in human history. Or, is that better phrased as a return to the beliefs our ancestors held since the beginning of human history?

The UFO Paradigm Shift

There is no record of recent influence in human affairs, by the occupants of UFOs, although there have been reports of high tech tampering with nuclear weapons and possible power interferences during exotic weapons testing. This is, of course, excluding the exotheological concept that the ancient religious writings were inspired by extraterrestrial contact. Most of the UFO contact recorded with the military is because of the mere presence of UFOs, not any aggressive action on their part. Just the fact that they are there seems to make those witnessing them presume they are, somehow, interfering with human activity.

[…]

article continues at UFO Digest

While we are at it, you should download this incredible pair of clips of a UFO shot in France April 24th from two different locations by two people independent of each other. Then you should download the classic ‘UFOs are Real‘; the best UFO documentary ever made.

I recently had a short email exchange about this subject, and since I found the torrent of the high res south of France footage, its as good a time as any to post it:

+++++++

***** ***** wrote:

I’m assuming you’ve seen this, but just to make sure…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,2071275,00.html

Yes! I saw that – interesting how they have so many filess when they claim they have had and do not have any interest in the subject.

We watched UFOs are real. To be honest, it’s somewhat preaching to the converted in me and ***** (actually, we’ve never converted. We’ve always known), but it was nice to see some things I’d not really heard of. The strongest earth-originated fact was the letter from J. Edgar Hoover complaining that the navy had ‘snatched’ something.

And the army would not let them have it for cursory inspection! Its just amazing isn’t it? and the brain dead journalists and SETI dorks like Seth Shostack still insist that there is no evidence!

Its an astonishing documentary. The facts are laid out perfectly. The photos of the same object or different objects from the same manufacturer, taken at different times in different places just blows away any doubt you could harbor. There is so much in there, all logically presented, without any new-age garbage.

The part about the inventor of the transistor saying man would never land on the moon and the example of the difference between jets and sailing ships is also good; it makes it clear to even the dumbest that saying ‘impossible’ is really a dumb thing to do. This stuff is real, it is happening, it has been happening for generations, and there is nothing we can do about it.

It still confuses me a little though, that despite so many sightings there has still been no single event capable of convincing an extremely sceptical public. It needn’t be a landing in Trafalgar Square, but just enough and public enough to deflect accusations of hallucination/storytelling/madness/attention-seeking/whatever.

increasingly i think this is a good thing. I really have had enough of these ‘world changing events’, and this one would be the mother of them all!

I find it incredible that every substantial piece of evidence that could do so has been swept under the carpet (or Hoover’ed up!). Tis a shame. Have you found that this film has changed anyone’s mind? I doubt it has. People are conditioned not to believe this type of evidence, which is why An Undeniable Event is required.

It may be coming…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77FjyBe7cQM&feature=player_profilepage

This and the guernsey sighting a few days ago, plus the O’Hare….its getting silly. And the media is no longer laughing off the stories, and is publishing them left right and centre. That, and the all pervasive cameras in the hands of punters, means we are heading towards this world changing event. Bad News.

This release of information certainly isn’t that event. I don’t expect to find any evidence lurking in the MoD files! And anyone who does must be loopy.

I’m not sure why they are even bothering. Actually, I DO know why; the French have done it, and so, not to be outdone, the Brits are having their ‘me too’ moment, to show that actually, they are not incompetent, they have been studying this also. India has been publishing some very bizarre stories detailing the science that has been gleaned from this area. It reads like….beyond science fiction.

Everyone knows that the best cases were not part of the Bluebook system, and with these MOD files, for certain the best evidence will not be in there.

At the end of the day, unless private people can get a hold of the technology and make use of it, I now take the position that we should keep it secret, so that we can continue with our lives as they are.

Can you IMAGINE what would happen if it ever became irrefutable? Everything would be turned upside down. We need MORE certainty, not LESS, and this event would bring more instability and uncertainty.

These people (and they really ARE people) can do things we can scarcely dream of. Once this secret is out, and out in detail, its ‘game over’.

No one seems to talk about another aspect of this that will totally change everything…. Culture.

These people have their own culture. It is certainly much older than ours. Inevitably, humans will start to adopt their culture and philosophy. It has happened every time a more advanced civilization meets an ‘inferior’ one; the inferior one looses its identity either partially or entirely.

Human culture will be contaminated beyond repair; in fact it has already happened by virtue of the sightings and the response of governments. Because knowledge of this is limited to a few people, the real impact has not happened, and the contamination is limited to science fiction, but once it is real, and these people hand over some books, thats it, its over.

Their political, philosophical and other ideas will spread like a California brushfire, wiping out our identity and culture. In a few hundred years there will not be a single human alive that is really human in its thinking. Every man woman and child will have adopted some part of alien culture into their mindset, and indeed, this is quite natural for us, since we like to learn things. Sadly, the things we have to learn from them will be so astonishing that they will supplant our ideas.

Think about it; a culture that can travel to other planets must have organization that works well. Everyone will want to apply those principles to their own lives and projects and interpersonal interactions. Politics, how we breed…everything will be transformed completely, and it doesn’t matter what form their ideas take; because they are ‘superior’, everyone will assume that their ways are better.

No. I think these people and their information need to be kept out of our loop, lest we become a Cargo Cult planet of slavering servants.

Take a look at the COMETA report, if you have not already done so:

http://www.scribd.com/search?query=cometa

The French have been taking this seriously for decades, for all the good it has done them.

Lataz!

./a

+++++++

And there you have it.

Nothing lasts forever, that is for sure, and Disclosure is coming, that is also a certainty. Will it be a good thing or a bad thing, that is the question. Today, I think it will be mostly if not all bad.

I could be wrong…

A German network of home educators have asked us to please write to the minister below and put international pressure on them.
Thank you Leslie

Dear Friends,
we want to inform you that again a homeschooling family in Germany is under severe pressure. The Dudek family from German state of Hesse is threatened to be send to prison because of homeschooling their children. Different from most of the other German states in Hesse, homeschooling fulfills the facts of a criminal offence. In most of the other states it is only an administrative offence.

The following information is a translation of an article which appears yesterday in the local newspaper. Especially consider the last sentence in the article. It is striking. We will keep you informed about the case. Perhaps we need again international help.

It is embarrassing that German officials put parents into jail whose children are well educated and where the family is in good order. We personally know the Dudeks as such a family.

The responsible minister of education of Hesse is:
Hessisches Kultusministerium
Mrs. Karin Wolff
Luisenplatz 10
65185 Wiesbaden
06151/17120
E-Mail: ministerin@hkm.hessen.de

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Joerg Grosseluemern
Netzwerk Bildungsfreiheit – Network for Freedom in Education

Dudek family to go before court once again.

By Harald Sagawe

Prosecutor Herwig Muller has appealed against the verdict in the case of Rosemarie and Jürgen Dudek. The couple from the German town of Archfeld in Herleshausen was sentenced to fines at the beginning of May. In the meantime the prosecutor in Kassel has applied for jail sentences of three months each, without probation, for the parents of six children.

Rosemarie and Jürgen Dudek were sentenced because they did not send their children to school, for religious reasons. The parents, Christians who closely follow the bible, teach their children themselves. Two years ago the court had also dealt with the Dudeks. That case, dealing with the payment of a fine, had been dropped. An application for the approval of a state-recognised private school – which, according to experts, has no chance of success at any rate – has still not been decided by the school authorities.

“It’s a terrible thing, to lock up a family that hasn’t done anyone any harm,” says the accused, Jürgen Dudek.
The prosecutor, Herwig Müller, is currently on vacation. Chief prosecutor Hans-Manfred Jung confirmed the veto, but could not say anything about the reasons.

Jürgen Dudek is horrified at the idea that the prosecution wants to see him and his wife behind bars. “It’s a terrible thing, to lock up a family that hasn’t done anyone any harm,” he says, “especially now, with the legal situation looking the way it is.” He regards the matter as absurd.

The judge’s job is to pronounce a verdict and not mix himself up in administrative matters, says Arno Meissner, director of the education department. Meanwhile he makes it clear that his office will by no means leave the family in peace, not even temporarily. “We will enforce compulsory school attendance against the family as promptly as possible. First his office intends to talk with the family, then to set a time limit and if this is not met, it will once again open a criminal case against them. Not even the announcement of a move by the family will settle the matter, declared Meissner.

Meissner dismissed the criticism made by Peter Höbbel, the judge of the juvenile court, against his department. We won’t let ourselves be admonished by a judge in that way, he said. “His duty is to make a judgement when the prosecutor brings a charge and to stay out of administrative matters.” Höbbel had rebuked the education department because it has been sitting on the Dudeks’ application for the approval of a private school for two and a half years, with no decision having been made about it.

http://www.hna.de/

[…]

The bad guys never learn do they?

Criminals will target ID cards as the ”gold standard” of identity theft, a police chief said yesterday.

The assumption that they are foolproof will make them more enticing for forgers, said Colin Langham-Fitt, acting chief constable of Suffolk.

He also questioned the erosion of individual liberties and privacy.

“There should be a debate about the ongoing erosion of civil liberties in the name of the fight against terrorism and crime,” he said.

“Are we all happy to have our cards monitored wherever we go, to be on CCTV and to have our shopping tracked?”

Mr Langham-Fitt added: “With all this surveillance available, the question needs to be asked – are we happy with that? Does it make us feel better and safer?

“I haven’t got the answers but I would welcome the debate beyond the cliched response of, ‘If you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about’.”

His comments undermine Government claims that the police support ID cards and other surveillance measures.

Mr Langham-Fitt, in an interview with the East Anglian Daily Times, said the cards could become “the gold standard of ID crime” and “it could raise the standards and stakes for those who wish to clone them or subvert the system”.

A Suffolk police spokesman said Mr Langham-Fitt was not representing the views of the force but expressing “personal” opinions.

A Home Office spokesman said: “The Government recognises that some people are concerned about the scheme infringing their civil liberties – that is why there are stringent safeguards built into the Identity Cards Act.”

Further questions were raised over the security of confidential information with the disclosure that the personal details of Indians applying for British visas could be obtained via the Foreign Office website. Channel 4 News reported that an identity thief or a terrorist could obtain sensitive information that could be used to apply for an ID card.

Damian Green, the Tory immigration spokesman, said: “This is yet another IT shambles from the Government with serious implications for security.”

Mr Green added: “This Government cannot even run a simple online visa application system without betraying all the sensitive information.

“What hope has it got of protecting the integrity of the National Identity Card Register?”

[…]

Telegraph

I choked on my Espresso when I read this.

When the police come out against something like this you can bet that it is in serious trouble.

He may be expressing his ‘personal opinions’ but it is clear that Mr. Langham-Fitt understands PERFECTLY what the NIR and the ID Card scheme means to ‘The British way of life®’. It means its end.

It is heartening that someone in the police is bucking the current mania for ‘security’ (which in the case of ID Cards is actually Security Theatre) and is actually THINKING about what is really happening. He cannot be the only one. I certainly hope that pieces like the Frances Stonor-Saunders email have been circulated amongst his colleagues. If the police come out against it, it cannot EVER possibly work.

Gordon Brown…BACK DOWN!

You read that phrase here first!

DHS proposes guidelines for proving one’s identity and residence when applying for a Real ID card. Yet while the department concedes it’s a monumental task to prove one’s domicile or residence, it leaves it up to the states to determine what documents would be adequate proof of residence–and even suggests that a utility bill or bank statement might be appropriate documentation. If so, a person could easily generate multiple proof-of-residence documents. Basing Real ID on such easy-to-forge documents obviates a large portion of what Real ID is supposed to accomplish.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly for Americans, the very last paragraph of the 160-page Real ID document deserves special attention. In a nod to states’ rights advocates, DHS declares that states are free not to participate in the Real ID system if they choose — but any identification card issued by a state that does not meet Real ID criteria is to be clearly labeled as such, to include “bold lettering” or a “unique design” similar to how many states design driver’s licenses for those under 21 years of age.

In its own guidance document, the department has proposed branding citizens not possessing a Real ID card in a manner that lets all who see their official state-issued identification know that they’re “different,” and perhaps potentially dangerous, according to standards established by the federal government. They would become stigmatized, branded, marked, ostracized, segregated. All in the name of protecting the homeland; no wonder this provision appears at the very end of the document.

One likely outcome of this DHS-proposed social segregation is that people presenting non-Real ID identification automatically will be presumed suspicious and perhaps subject to additional screening or surveillance to confirm their innocence at a bar, office building, airport, or routine traffic stop. Such a situation would establish a new form of social segregation–an attempt to separate “us” from “them” in the age of counterterrorism and the new normal, where one is presumed suspicious until proven more suspicious.

Two other big-picture concerns about Real ID come to mind: Looking at the overall concept of a national identification database, and given existing data security controls in large distributed systems, one wonders how vulnerable this system-of-systems will be to data loss or identity theft resulting from unscrupulous employees, flawed technologies, external compromises or human error–even under the best of security conditions. And second, there is no clear guidance on the limits of how the Real ID database would be used. Other homeland security initiatives, such as the Patriot Act, have been used and applied–some say abused–for purposes far removed from anything related to homeland security. How can we ensure the same will not happen with Real ID? […]

And there you have it, from Shneier.

Attention needs to be drawn to the similarities between the Apartheid system’s Pass Laws and ID cards. People think that there is no similarity because the reason for the laws is not explicitly ‘race’. What they fail to understand is that the effect of these ID cards is the same as racist Apartheid, only it applies to everyone. Everyone becomes ‘black’ (underprivileged) and only the state is ‘white’ (elite class).

Panorama, that thin grey shadow of what was once a decent current events programme decades ago, has got itself completely owned, busted and exposed as fabricated garbage by some VERY organized people.

Take a look at this episode of Panorama (three parts)

And then look at this rebuttal of that programme (three parts), and witness the dirty tricks, rule breaking, scubaggery and vile behavior of John Sweeny, dyed in the wool BBQer.

The difference between this event and all the other BBQ hatchet job, tabloid ambush affairs is that this time, they got caught red handed.

If everyone who was interviewed by BBQ had access to this level of counterintelligence, they would never be able to get away with the utter garbage (in six parts) they regularly trot out as ‘journalism’.

BBQ is toast in teh internet age. YES ‘teh’. Eventually, everyone will instantly be able to see the other side of the story every time a programme is made, and ‘journalists’ like the grotesque toad Sweeny and the nauseating and nasal Louis Theroux and their revolting style of cheap, inferior, insulting, LCD, propagandistic and simple minded programme making will be put to rest.

BBQ is getting smashed alot recently. We noted the ‘filesharing is piracy’ lie and retraction and laughed out loud at the ‘911 Conspiracy Files’ debacle and the Building Seven has fallen but not fallen episode. So enormous is this epidemic of untruth at the BBQ that there are sites dedicated to documenting the lie spreading machine that is BBQ.

That these people still think they can get away scott free with transmitting garbage is the most astonishing thing of all.

…to change your mind?

It looks like there has been a comprehensive victory for all Home Schoolers in the UK:

Going to school ‘not compulsory’
Councils in England are being reminded that parents have the right to educate their children at home if they wish.

Proposed Department for Education and Skills guidelines on “elective home education” stress that education is compulsory but schooling is not.

Councils should offer support to home educators, and parents must see that their children are suitably educated.

But the authorities have no right to enter people’s homes or make routine checks on children’s progress.

The department has been discussing the issue with several groups representing home educators and with local authorities.

It has decided not to propose any changes to current monitoring arrangements or legislation.

It has dropped plans for compulsory registration of home-educated children.

Instead it is proposing to issue guidelines for the first time, which point out that it is fundamental to the English system that the responsibility for educating children rests on the parents.

That same principle also applies in the devolved education systems in the rest of the UK.

What parents must provide is “efficient full-time education” suitable to their children’s age, ability and aptitude and any special educational needs.

Most do this by sending their children to school, but some prefer home education.

Nobody knows how many. Research commissioned by the education department said it might range between 7,400 and 34,400, while the guidance notes say it might be 40,000 and councils are working with half that number.

The proposed guidance says local authorities now have a duty to try to identify children in danger of missing education.

But it says they have “no statutory duties in relation to monitoring the quality of home education on a routine basis”.

They could intervene only if they have “good reason” – it stresses – to believe parents were not providing a suitable education.

They could ask parents to provide information. Parents “are under no duty to comply” though it would be “sensible” to do so.

Serving a school attendance order should be “a last resort”.

Allegations

The aim should be to build a trusting relationship between families and local officials.

This is something that can be lacking at present.

Some parents claim local authorities have told people to educate their children themselves, to evade their responsibilities to provide for those with special needs.

And some local authority officials have said parents sometimes claim to be home educating to hide abuse.

The guidelines accept that local authorities get no money for helping home educators, but say they should at least provide written information and website links.

They say there will be diversity in people’s approaches to education.

“Children learn in different ways and at different times and speeds.”

‘Very good news’

Consultation on the proposed guidelines runs until the end of July. They have been welcomed by one of the main home educators’ groups, Education Otherwise.

“Confirmation from DfES that they have no intention of changing the existing legal framework, nor to make registration compulsory, is very good news indeed.”

Spokesperson Ann Newstead said they appeared to be “a welcome change to the kind of documents that home educators have seen used in the past by local authorities”.

Details needed to be checked. One of the accompanying documents said registering children educated at home would be made compulsory, but the department had assured her this was an earlier draft, published in error.

“These are the most positive statements that have been coming out from the DfES,” she said.

“It really is so heart-warming to families to have their choices recognised in this way.”

[…]

BBQ

This really is VERY good news!

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, so we will not take our gaze off of this, but for now, this is a perfect result. Government backs down and gets out of people’s business and everyone is happy and prospers.

Now everyone can get back to doing the job of designing experiments, planning trips, taking papers, revising etc etc….if that is the sort of Home Schooler you are of course.

BRAVO to all those who made the effort to get this magic done!