http://www.radioheadremix.com/remix/?id=709

We expected this to happen:

1.2.3 Section 436A requires all local authorities to make arrangements to enable them to establish (so far as it is possible to do so) the identities of children residing in their area who are not receiving a suitable education. In relation to children, by ‘suitable education’ we mean efficient full-time education suitable to her/his age, ability and aptitude and to any special educational needs the child may have. 

And here is the true purpose of this entire exercise.

This is the way they are going to get every child in England into and justify the existence of ContactPoint.

[…]

The goal of these guidelines is to create a way to sweep up all the home educating children in the UK, identify them, categorize them and put them on a database, together with the names of their parents, siblings, ethnicity and other details. See below. Once again, children who are being educated at home, privately, or in alternative provision should not be subject to being identified for this purpose, since they are being educated quite legally.

[…]

http://irdial.com/blogdial/?p=1217

And now its even worse than we thought it would be:

By Lauren Higgs
Children & Young People Now
17 September 2008

The national database of everyone who is under 18 in England is to be used to identify children missing from education.

Monthly reports created by the ContactPoint database will be sent to local authorities listing the names of children not recorded at an education setting.

The School Census for state schools and pupil lists from independent schools and pupil referral units will be used to complete the relevant field on ContactPoint. Children not accounted for will feature in the reports, which are intended to help children missing education teams focus their work.

But Fiona Nicholson, chair of home schooling organisation Education Otherwise, said the reports will mean councils target home-educated children. She said: “ContactPoint should not be used for this.”

But Richard Stiff, chair of the information systems and technology policy committee at the Association of Directors of Children’s Services, said the reports would not change the way councils treat home-educated children: “It is unlikely this will be a tool in the armoury of the state.”

Thanks to the vigilant lurker who sent this in.

If this article is correct, someone will extract and print monthly reports from ContactPoint of groups of children. This means that the names addresses and other private details of children in the UK will be distributed all over the place; any claim that ContactPoint is secure is once again shown to be absolute nonsense.

Once these reports are printed out or emailed, they can be copied and stored in another database. Imagine the value of this database to someone who wants to get a hold of every home schooler in the UK. This list would be worth literally millions of pounds.

We have written about ContactPoint and the nature of data before.

Richard Stiff is either lying or is painfully naïve.

The new duties that Local Authorities have to make sure children are receiving suitable education dovetail with ContactPoint perfectly. Once they have a list of all people who are not in school, they will be able to claim that they do not know whether or not the children listed are being educated suitably; their duty would kick in automatically, and they would be compelled to go through the list and inspect every single name, if only to see who is home educating and who is not.

If Richard Stiff cannot see this then he is unfit to hold his chair; in any case, he sits on the information systems and technology policy committee, which has nothing to do with Local Authorities and how they do and do not operate.

This article begs the question, “what other reports are going to be generated by ContactPoint?”. It is clear that as we predicted, the ContactPoint data will have completely escaped within a matter of months. All of the Security Theatre that they have shrouded around it is now proven to be completely useless.

Think about it. If a list of all children who are not listed as being in school is sent to all 410 Local Authorities every month, wether it is by email or in printed form that is a huge number of mass points of escape. ContactPoint was originally sold as a way for the 330,000 workers who will have access to it to find information on particular children, and not children en masse or children of a particular category or class.

It is obvious that the next step in ContactPoint’s development is to use it to generate a list of all muslim children, to make sure that they are not being exposed to extremism. For example. Or to create a list of all children of a certain ‘race’, to do some analysis on them as a group. You can add whatever pretext you like to this list obviously. Anyone who does not think that this is going to happen is living on another planet.

It is now abundantly clear that massive abuses of ContactPoint are to be standard operating procedure. I recommend that if you have children, you do everything you can to get them out of and keep them away from ContactPoint. If you cannot do so, then next in your list of possible responses is to refuse to respond in any way to anything that was generated or a result of a search on ContactPoint. If everyone were to do this, ContactPoint would be a very dangerous thing to access, because if the alert parent finds out it was used to contact them, it could cause a total ‘shut out’.

All those who are depressed by this constant stream of extreme and nauseating news; take heart. All of this will go away, just like the Soviet Union, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, BCCI, Franco, PanAm and every other seemingly unassailable person and institution. Your job is to keep yourself free while the rest of the world and time itself catches up with these monsters.

I am a loyal citizen of the United States of America, and I believe deeply in the vision of the Founding Fathers, the rule of law as enshrined in the Constitution, and the liberty that our forefathers fought and died for.

I have therefore felt a duty to obey the laws of the U.S. my whole life.

However, it is likely that the U.S. no longer has a constitutional form of government.

As the Washington Post noted in March 2002, Bush hid from Congress the fact that Continuity of Government (COG) plans were implemented on 9/11 and were still in effect many months later, and stated:

It was unclear yesterday whether any federal documents — prepared either by the current White House or by Bush’s predecessors dating to Dwight D. Eisenhower — specify whether congressional leaders should be told if the plan is put into effect. At least one relatively general document, a 1988 executive order entitled “Assignment of Emergency Preparedness Responsibilities,” said the White House’s National Security Council “shall arrange for Executive branch liaison with, and assistance to, the Congress and the federal judiciary on national security-emergency preparedness matters.”

The executive order, signed by President Ronald Reagan, is a precursor to documents outlining the contingency plans in greater detail, which have not been made public. Regardless of whether Bush had an obligation to notify legislative leaders, the congressional leaders’ ignorance of the plan he set in motion could raise the question of how this shadow administration would establish its legitimacy with Congress in the event it needed to step in for a crippled White House.

At least some members of Congress suggested yesterday that the administration should have conferred about its plans, which were first reported in The Washington Post yesterday.

“There are two other branches of government that are central to the functioning of our democracy,” said Rep. William Delahunt (D-Mass.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee. “I would hope the speaker and the minority leader would at least pose the question, ‘What about us?’ “

So What?

Remember that, in the summer 2007, Congressman Peter DeFazio, on the Homeland Security Committee (and so with proper security access to be briefed on COG issues), inquired about continuity of government plans, and was refused access. Indeed, DeFazio told Congress that the entire Homeland Security Committee of the U.S. Congress has been denied access to the plans by the White House (video; or here is the transcript). The Homeland Security Committee has full clearance to view all information about COG plans. DeFazio concluded: “Maybe the people who think there’s a conspiracy out there are right”.
And University of California Berkeley Professor Emeritus Peter Dale Scott has warned:

“If members of the Homeland Security Committee cannot enforce their right to read secret plans of the Executive Branch, then the systems of checks and balances established by the U.S. Constitution would seem to be failing.

To put it another way, if the White House is successful in frustrating DeFazio, then Continuity of Government planning has arguably already superseded the Constitution as a higher authority.”

Indeed, White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said that “because of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the American public needs no explanation of [Continuity of Government] plans”.

What Does This All Mean?

Continuity of government documents probably require that Congress be notified of the details of implementation of COG plans. But since the executive is hiding such documents from Congress and the people, so we can’t be sure.

Regardless, the executive has failed to “establish its legitimacy with Congress” or the American people, because it is hiding the documents which created the COG emergency government and which give it emergency powers and specify its obligations.

In other words, even if the COG documents were harmless and say “we will coordinate with Congress and the courts and follow the Constitution”, the fact that the White House is hiding the documents, refusing to disclose what acts it has taken pursuant to extraordinary authority granted by the COG plans, and refusing even to say whether a COG government is still in effect renders the current government unconstitutional and illegal.

I consider myself a law-abiding citizen, and I cherish the Constitution, the rule of law, and the American form government established by the Founding Fathers.

But do I have any duty to obey the orders of a government that cannot even establish its basic legitimacy? A government which is itself violating the Constitution and the rule of law? A government that is trying to dismantle the vision that the Founding Fathers and everything that our forefathers fought and died for?

Do I have to obey illegal orders from an unconstitutional government?

This essay doesn’t even discuss spying on Americans, failure to comply with Congressional subpoenas, signing statements, torture, wars based on false intelligence, or the numerous other unconstitutional acts by this administration. It solely focuses on the unconstitutionality of the COG plans.

And it doesn’t even get into guessing what the Founding Fathers might have thought about this bunch of tyrants.

[…]

From George Washington’s Blog

When a very popular man stands up and says what needs to be said…

For 30 years he was one the BBC’s star presenters, stitching up celebrities and subjecting guests on his show to the horrors of the gunge tank. But now Noel Edmonds himself could be in the line of fire, after he announced that he was leading a boycott of the television licence fee.

The former Noel’s House Party presenter, who accused the BBC of “hectoring and threatening” the public into paying the £139.50 annual charge, could be stripped of his ceremonial title of Deputy Lieutenant of Devon, after confessing to his criminality, The Times has learnt.

In an interview at the weekend, Edmonds declared that for four months he had refused to pay the licence fee, a legal requirement for anyone who owns a television, adding that he was prepared to be prosecuted for evading the tax.

Eric Dancer, Lord-Lieutenant of Devon, said yesterday that he would investigate whether Edmonds should lose his position, which carries the blessing of the Queen.

Edmonds assumed the title – which involves assisting the Lord-Lieutenant in arranging the monarch’s visits to Devon, leading the local magistracy and hearing grievances between citizens and tax officials – in 2004.

Mr Dancer told The Times: “If a deputy did do something that was a criminal offence, I’m sure that people who commit serious misdemeanours are not allowed to continue to serve.”

Edmonds made his remarks in an interview with the Breakfast show on BBC One on Saturday, the day before hosting a one-off show on Sky aimed at helping to mend “broken Britain”.

Referring to advertisements by the TV Licensing Authority that threaten prosecution of those who fail to pay the fee, Edmonds said: “I worked for the BBC for 30 years. When I was there it promoted the licence fee by saying how wonderful it was. But now Auntie’s put boxing gloves on.

“I am not going to have the BBC or any other organisation threatening me. I’ve cancelled my TV licence and they haven’t found me. Nobody’s coming knocking on my door. There are too many organisations that seem to think it is OK to badger, hector and threaten people.”

The BBC launched a public consultation last week after receiving complaints that advertisements which warned, “Your town, your street, your home . . . it’s all in our database”, amounted to bullying.

[…]

Noel’s HQ, screened last night on Sky One, was aimed at promoting a “fairer, more caring Britain”. Edmonds told viewers: “You clearly feel frustrated and at times angry at the tidal wave of new rules, regulations and laws that have been introduced in the name of health and safety, security or the environment. Well, the politicians have had their turn, and now it’s ours. It’s down to you, me and them, and to everyone who wants to live in a more caring society.”

[…]

The Times

From the most unexpected quarter…someone who could actually rally millions of people says ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

The Telegraph has a story that is direcly related to the previous post about the TSA and the irrational mania for lists, and the other BLOGDIAL posts about this insanity

Despite ministers admitting of concerns the laws could spark a wave of claims, officers will be able to tell worried parents about the history of someone who has access to their children, if they think they could be dangerous.

They will give out details of convictions, arrests and acquittals for child sex and violence offences as well as unproven suspicions kept on file.

Incredible.

Unproven suspicions kept on file? That means that a single phone call could put you in the police database as a sex criminal, FOREVER, and everyone would be able to access that and brand you as the ultimate kind of monster.

This is beyond imagining.

Critics said the scheme was a “return to witch trials” which would create a climate of unnecessary suspiction.

Police want single mothers to ask for information about their new boyfriends and believe those under suspicion will welcome the opportunity to prove they have nothing to hide.

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear? I thought we were past that nonsense!

Grandparents and neighbours can also demand that police look into the records of anyone – even teenagers – who come into contact with their friends’ or family members’ children.

Officers, meanwhile, will pass on the results of their investigation to the child’s parents, carers or guardians.

And how do you think they are going to co-ordinate all of this? Through the NIR and ContactPoint of course.

The pilot schemes, which come into force in four police forces across England, are being set up following a campaign for “Sarah’s Law” – the public disclosure of the names and addresses of paedophiles named in honour of Sarah Payne.

This is completely nauseating, and is probably an accidental misuse of english. How does it honor a victim of a crime to have a law named after them? How many other laws are to be thus named? Will the statue books in the future be full of names of people and not descriptive text?

The campaign was established after the eight year-old was murdered by convicted sex offender, Roy Whiting, in 2000.

Officers, however, said the new scheme does not go that far as measures called on by child protection campaigners.

Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, said: “Giving parents the ability to find out if someone close to their child poses a risk will empower them.”

Jacqui Smith…I am not going to waste any bandwidth in this article on that monster.

Vernon Coaker, the Home Office minister, admitted there were concerns that “huge numbers of claims” could be made by worried parents but he insisted: “We don’t believe that doing nothing is appropriate and in the best interests of our children.” Critics however, warn the scheme would create a climate of suspicion with thousands of innocent people having their lives scrutinised.

In any country where reason was the rule, this could never happen. In any country where the state was properly accountable to the citizenry the same would be true. Defamation of character is a serious matter, and in a properly run society, if the police ruined your reputation they should be forced to pay out millions in compensation and the officers involved would be sacked. In Britain however, there is no such redress available even for the smallest mistake, and so these officers have carte-blanche to destroy the lives of anyone who they mistakenly identify as an evil doer. And these mistakes WILL HAPPEN.

They also fear it could lead to vigilante attacks on people found to have child sex convictions.

What about the vigilante attacks against those who are wrongly identified by the police? And what about the vigilante attacks on people mistakenly identified by vigilantes? This is a pandora’s box, a nightmare scenario and TOTALLY INSANE.

The announcement comes after The Telegraph revealed that all adults who work with children and are accused of abuse must be investigated by council officers and have details of the claim, even if it was totally malicious, kept on their personnel records until they retire.

In addition, 11.3 million people who work or volunteer with under-16s will from next year have their backgrounds scrutinised by a new vetting body.

Guy Herbert, general secretary of the civil liberties group No2ID, said: “It’s virtually a return to the witch trials, and is the logical conclusion of our zero-trust society. Everybody is being encouraged to be suspicious of everybody else.

Guy Herbert has come up with a beautiful and perfect phrase; ‘Zero-Trust Society’.

This society is the projected reality brought into being by the personalities, character and true nature of the politicians in New Labor. They are superimposing their own flawed view of human nature onto Britain, and through this projection, we get a real picture of the inhuman monsters they really are; fear soaked, suspicious, paedophile sex obsessed, broken spirited, criminal, untrustworthy, lying, thieving, Godless, animals who are hell bent on re-creating Britain in their own image.

“The police won’t be able to isolate the information once they release it, and it will be full of unsubstantiated allegations and suspicions. It is potentially incredibly dangerous.”

Once the data is out there, it is out there forever. But you know this!

What is most galling about this is that the government is putting together the paedophile catalogue ContactPoint on the one hand, an then with the other hand is putting in measures to expose the very people they are facilitating by putting together ContactPoint in the first place. They really are THAT STUPID.

Donald Findlater, of the child protection charity Lucy Faithfull Foundation, added: “The biggest risk to children is not from the registered sex offender who the police know and are managing; it is from the sex offender who is not registered and who no one knows about.”

[…]

Telegraph

And that is the crux of this; you cannot use a list to predict the behavior of a person. Everyone now knows this, so there must be another reason why they are putting these lists together, and quite separately, there must be a reason why they are giving access to real and false criminal evidence to everyone everywhere.

The logical conclusion is that they are deliberately trying to create a Zero-Trust Society, where the last remnants of social cohesion and normal behavior are stripped away, replaced by a government mediated trust that will exert control over everyone in every thing they do. This will be controlled by the ID card, which will be used not only to control and track every movement and financial transaction, but it will also be the talisman and token of trust that will enable your interpersonal relationships to take place. The government and its card will be between you and everything. Literally. And after one generation, no one will remember what it was like to take a person on faith, no one will work on instinct, on gut feelings.

You would be better off living in the Amazonian jungle amongst the most ‘primitive’ people on earth; at least there human beings really will be human beings an not components in a nightmare machine where everything, even human instinct is replaced by a card.

From Bruce Schneier’s Cryptogram, yet another crystal clear explanation of why the TSA’s list of ‘terrorists’ is completely bogus:

The TSA is tightening its photo ID rules at airport security. Previously, people with expired IDs or who claimed to have lost their IDs were subjected to secondary screening. Then the Transportation Security Administration realized that meant someone on the government’s no-fly list — the list that is supposed to keep our planes safe from terrorists — could just fly with no ID.

Now, people without ID must also answer personal questions from their credit history to ascertain their identity. The TSA will keep records of who those ID-less people are, too, in case they’re trying to probe the system.

This may seem like an improvement, except that the photo ID requirement is a joke. Anyone on the no-fly list can easily fly whenever he wants. Even worse, the whole concept of matching passenger names against a list of bad guys has negligible security value.

How to fly, even if you are on the no-fly list: Buy a ticket in some innocent person’s name. At home, before your flight, check in online and print out your boarding pass. Then, save that web page as a PDF and use Adobe Acrobat to change the name on the boarding pass to your own. Print it again. At the airport, use the fake boarding pass and your valid ID to get through security. At the gate, use the real boarding pass in the fake name to board your flight.

The problem is that it is unverified passenger names that get checked against the no-fly list. At security checkpoints, the TSA just matches IDs to whatever is printed on the boarding passes. The airline checks boarding passes against tickets when people board the plane. But because no one checks ticketed names against IDs, the security breaks down.

This vulnerability isn’t new. It isn’t even subtle. I wrote about it in 2003, and again in 2006. I asked Kip Hawley, who runs the TSA, about it in 2007. Today, any terrorist smart enough to Google “print your own boarding pass” can bypass the no-fly list.

This gaping security hole would bother me more if the very idea of a no-fly list weren’t so ineffective. The system is based on the faulty notion that the feds have this master list of terrorists, and all we have to do is keep the people on the list off the planes.

That’s just not true. The no-fly list — a list of people so dangerous they are not allowed to fly yet so innocent we can’t arrest them — and the less dangerous “watch list” contain a combined 1 million names representing the identities and aliases of an estimated 400,000 people. There aren’t that many terrorists out there; if there were, we would be feeling their effects.

Almost all of the people stopped by the no-fly list are false positives. It catches innocents such as Ted Kennedy, whose name is similar to someone’s on the list, and Yusuf Islam (formerly Cat Stevens), who was on the list but no one knew why.

The no-fly list is a Kafkaesque nightmare for the thousands of innocent Americans who are harassed and detained every time they fly. Put on the list by unidentified government officials, they can’t get off. They can’t challenge the TSA about their status or prove their innocence. (The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decided this month that no-fly passengers can sue the FBI, but that strategy hasn’t been tried yet.)

But even if these lists were complete and accurate, they wouldn’t work. Timothy McVeigh, the Unabomber, the D.C. snipers, the London subway bombers and most of the 9/11 terrorists weren’t on any list before they committed their terrorist acts. And if a terrorist wants to know if he’s on a list, the TSA has approved a convenient, $100 service that allows him to figure it out: the Clear program, which issues IDs to “trusted travelers” to speed them through security lines. Just apply for a Clear card; if you get one, you’re not on the list.

In the end, the photo ID requirement is based on the myth that we can somehow correlate identity with intent. We can’t. And instead of wasting money trying, we would be far safer as a nation if we invested in intelligence, investigation and emergency response — security measures that aren’t based on a guess about a terrorist target or tactic.

That’s the TSA: Not doing the right things. Not even doing right the things it does.

My previous articles on the subject:
http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0308.html#6
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/11/forge_your_own.html
http://www.schneier.com/interview-hawley.html

This article originally appeared in the L.A. Times:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-schneier28-2008aug28,0,3099808.story or http://tinyurl.com/6dmcl4

All true, all correct.

What the article does not do however, is to explain the irrational TSA policy and how they can continue to do what they are doing unchallenged. TSA admins must know that what they are doing is incorrect and innefective in every way; they are not that stupid to believe the fairy story that they give as the pretext for their procedures.

There therefore must be another reason why they are persisting with this nonsense, instead of abandoning it completely as a big mistake.

Once explanation is that they want to put everyone in the country, and I mean every single man woman and child, on a new ‘Clean’ list, not for the purposes of anti terrorism, but for control of every aspect of life. I am talking about a national ID card that is needed for every transaction, no matter how small, as we have written about so many times.

We all know that the ‘security’ measures they are trying to roll out world-wide are not about security. It is high time that everyone start trying to figure out (for themselves) what the real agenda of all of this is. They will find that any conclusion they can come to is not pretty.

Trying to second guess the final maneuver and true agenda will also help us force the people who are trying to do this to state explicitly why they are doing it; if they cannot give a satisfactory answer they will be forced to shut it all down permanently.

Either way, we are fast approaching the point where the road forks, and they will either get away with rolling out the global police state or they are utterly destroyed.

Whilst googling around today for the uses of colloidal silver after reading an extraordinarily inflammatory post that I wont trouble you with, I wandered onto some facts about how children are being born in the USA. It is now the law, (a real, not color of law, actual statute, unlike the non existent mandatory vaccine laws) that Silver Nitrate or some other anti bacterial wash be dripped into the eyes of a newborn as soon as it emerges:

§16-3-10. It shall be unlawful for any physician, nurse-midwife or midwife, practicing midwifery, or other health care professional to neglect or otherwise fail to instill or have instilled, immediately upon its birth, in the eyes of the newborn babe, the contents of a single-use tube of an ophthalmic ointment containing one percent tetracycline or one half of one percent erythromycin or the equivalent dosage of such medications or other appropriate medication approved by the director for prevention of inflammation of the eyes of the newborn. Every physician, nurse-midwife or midwife or other health care professional shall, in making a report of a birth, state the name of the appropriate medication which was instilled into the eyes of said infant. The director shall establish a list of appropriate medications for prevention of inflammation of the eyes of the newborn. The list shall be kept current and distributed to appropriate health care facilities and such other sources as the director may determine to be necessary.

[…]

WTH??!!

‘What the heck’ indeed.

Naturally, the first reaction of any decent person is to think, “how the hell can anyone get away from this madness?”.

Home Birth is the first obvious choice; having a birth plan where Silver Nitrate or tetracycline is refused clearly is not an option, since the staff will simply say, “its the law” and secondly, they take your baby from you immediately and then do all their dastardly deeds out of sight.

But there is another way that is gaining momentum: ‘Freebirth’.

A Freebirth or Unassisted Childbirth is a birth where midwives and doctors are excluded by choice in advance.

This is what it looks like:

Of course, doctors obstetricians and the medical establishment are against this with all guns blazing. The fear-mongers are full of rubbish of course.

Read this from Laura Shanley’s Born Free website:

One of the greatest myths perpetuated by the medical system is that hospitals are the safest place to give birth. Stories abound of women dying in childbirth before the advent of modern hospitals. And yet, few people realize that women were not dying due to the fact that childbirth is inherently dangerous, but rather because of the living conditions at that time. Poor women were generally underfed and overworked during pregnancy, while wealthy women were often deprived of fresh air and sunshine because brown skin was considered socially unacceptable. Wealthy girls were corsetted from the age of eleven, so that by the time they turned fourteen, their pelvises were literally deformed. These physical factors, combined with various psychological ones (fear, shame, and guilt) led to the problems that some women encountered.

Throughout history, normal, healthy women have rarely died in childbirth. In fact, when birth moved from the home to the hospital in the 1920s, the infant and maternal mortality rates actually rose. A major study done as early as 1933 showed that hospital births were not as safe as home births. Studies done in the last twenty years, prove this is still the case. (Mayer Eisenstein, MD, The Home Court Advantage, 1988.)

When a laboring woman goes into the modern-day hospital, she is surrounded by medical personnel and machinery. Often she is told what to eat (generally nothing), what position to be in (generally flat on her back, which narrows the pelvic outlet and prevents her from utilizing the natural gravitational force), and when and when not to push (which interferes with her own instinctive knowledge of birth). Her progress is charted and measured and she is treated more like a machine than a thinking, feeling, intelligent adult.

If her labor is not progressing at the speed at which the hospital has arbitrarily decided it should be, she is often given drugs to speed things up. The drugs, however, may make her contractions more painful, which in turn, cause her to take more medication to deal with the pain. Not only does this medication prevent her from fully participating in the birthing process, it also crosses the placenta, adversely affecting her unborn baby.

Sometimes a woman’s body simply shuts down after all this intervention, and the woman is told she needs a cesarean section in order for her baby to be born safely. Unaware that the intervention she received actually caused the “complications” in the first place, she often consents “for the good of the baby.” Nearly one in four babies in this country are now born by cesarean section.

Many women who have given birth in the hospital report dissatisfaction not only with the way they were treated, but with the way their babies were treated as well. Babies are often taken away from their mothers immediately after birth to be weighed, measured, tested and cleaned. Eye drops are administered “just in case” a mother has a venereal disease, and Vitamin K is administered because babies are supposedly born “deficient.”

When a woman gives birth at home, she is free to eat what she wants, assume any position she wants, and push or not push depending on how she feels. When no one is telling her what to do, she is able to “tune in” and listen to “the still, small voice within.” The same loving consciousness that knew how to grow her baby inside her perfectly, knows how to get her baby out safely and easily, if only she will let it. With no one shouting commands at her, a woman is free to relax, and naturally birth her baby. After the birth, there is no one there to separate her from her baby. She can hold and nurse him as long as she wishes. Women all over the world are rediscovering the fact that birth works best when it is interfered with least.

In the past several years I have received hundreds of stories from women and couples who have successfully given birth without medical assistance. Their stories speak for themselves. No one, however, regardless of their “expertise,” can guarantee that a baby will be born safely. Some babies die. It’s simply nature’s way.

[…]

http://www.unassistedchildbirth.com/uc/isucsafe.html

That is all true, My friends™.

Finally, from the Washington Post article linked above:

The intensifying contractions were three minutes apart as Lynn Griesemer tried to reassure her 11-year-old daughter, who hovered anxiously beside her. Her husband, Bob, had not returned the four increasingly urgent messages she’d left on his cellphone and had neglected to give her his new office number at the Pentagon. The couple’s sixth child would be born that Friday in June 2002 and Griesemer was worried he might not make it in time.

Heh.

When someone from the Pentagon chooses unassisted childbirth, it makes you wonder, “just what has he read about vaccines and vitamin K to make him choose something so unusual?”.

But I digress.

I know someone who delivered his own son completely unassisted. He will tell anyone who asks that it is a most wonderful thing to deliver your own child.

And then there are all the other benefits of not having a drugged wife or a drugged baby, no arguments with bolshy staff about Vitamin K, bizarre vaccinations or harsh chemical eye wash, no forceful rotation of your baby’s legs to see if she has ‘clicky’ hips….a perfectly clean, natural fresh start, with everyone calm and no one destroyed or unnecessarily disturbed.

And just in case you didn’t know, if your baby DOES get conjunctivitis, all you need to do is squirt some breast milk into his or her eyes and it clears up perfectly.

Nature is best!

The usual disclaimers apply; if you have an elective Caesarian because of your workload in your job at the bank, and you want every vaccination going to be shot on day one, and you want Vitamin K, guthrie test with addition to DNA database, clicky hips rotation, eyes washed with tetracycline AND Silver Nitrate, straight onto vitamin fortified formula milk from Nestle, put directly into the crib and shipped off with the nanny….THAT IS YOUR BUSINESS AND YOUR RIGHT.

Take a look at this site, called ‘Gapminder’.

It is a fascinating piece of software that displays the positions of countries on a graph of different factors set against each other.

If you look at the default graph on this site, you will see that the most prosperous and longest living people live in Hong Kong.

Jim Rogers has moved his family, including his two daughter, to Singapore, where she is being tutored in Mandarin, because he wants. “to prepare her for the future”.

Fascinating.

And thanks to the lurker who pointed us to it.

Speaking of useful tools, check out this one, called ‘Sitefinder’: The Mobile Phone Base Station Database. You put your postcode into the slot, and it returns a map of all of the cellular telephone masts in your immediate area. Clicking on the blue triangles brings up information on who operates the transmitters and the amount of power they are outputting.

This is an amazing resource for those who do not want to buy a house that is being drenched in emissions from the many towers that provide near blanket coverage of the UK.

The Telegraph has an astonishing piece on ContactPoint: firms who have already demonstrated their incompetence are now in charge of ContactPoint:

Prisoner data loss firm allowed to work on database of every child in England

The private firm which lost the details of the entire prison population is being allowed to continue working on the controversial project to build a database of every child in England.

By Martin Beckford Social Affairs Correspondent

PA Consulting was branded “completely unacceptable” by ministers and lost its three-year contract with the Home Office after an employee mislaid an unencrypted memory stick containing the names, addresses and expected release dates of all 84,000 prisoners in England and Wales.

Its other contracts with the Home Office, worth £8million a year, are now under review.

But the firm is being allowed to continue working on the highly sensitive £224million ContactPoint scheme to create a computerised record of the names, addresses, dates of birth, parents, schools and GPs of all 11 million children in England, which has already been delayed by security concerns.

Critics said the involvement of PA Consulting – which is also working on the national ID card scheme – in the project should lead to it being scrapped completely, before any serious mistakes can be made.

There is so much wrong with this…..

Firstly, if we are to take the rationale behind the database madness at face value, why on earth are they making an ID database SEPARATE from a database of all children in the UK? It makes far more sense to keep everyone on a single database and then use access control to partition it.

Secondly, it is symbolic of the real reason why this insanity is being done; this is a way for companies to make money. This company is on a contract for ContactPoint. For certain, its contract for the ID card is separate and also worth a fortune. If this was being done efficiently, there would be one contract and not two.

This is a scam from start to finish, and none of it should have been done in the first place.

Terri Dowty, Director of Action on Rights for Children, said: “PA Consulting has been held responsible for one of the most serious data losses yet, after apparently disregarding specific instructions from the Home Office.

“How can the Government – or anyone else – possibly feel confident that children’s ContactPoint data will be safe?”

No one with a single working brain-cell does!

The Liberal Democrat Shadow Children, Schools and Families Secretary, David Laws, added: “Both the Government and now the company responsible for administering this database have proven themselves to be unreliable in safeguarding personal data.

“Serious concerns have already been raised about the security of the database. The revelation that PA Consulting Group are also involved will do nothing to reassure parents that their children’s personal details will be secure. This intrusive and costly project must now be scrapped altogether.”

And if it is not scrapped immediately, what should all the parents in the UK do about it?

This is the question that no one is asking and that no shadow minister will confront. If someone is literally attacking your child, what are you expected to do, just sit back and take it?

ContactPoint was delayed last year for a security review after HM Revenue & Customs lost CD-Roms containing the personal details of 25 million families, which concluded that the risk of a data breach on ContactPoint could never be eliminated.

At last, someone is telling the truth about this. In the light of this it is clear that ContactPoint should never be deployed and all work on it should be stopped.

Its launch was recently put back again after technical “glitches” were discovered in the software, while The Daily Telegraph disclosed that police will be allowed to trawl the database for evidence of crime among young people. ContactPoint, which will be accessible to 330,000 council workers, headteachers and social workers as well as police, had always been portrayed as a way of protecting children by improving links between professionals who work with them.

This is called feature creep. It ALWAYS happens with projects like this, as data by its nature is always valuable for more than one purpose. For example, data collected about any single activity can always be used to produce statistics of some sort; a minimum of two uses always exists. It also means that the data will ALWAYS and INEVITABLY be shared, since in order for it to be used, it has to be transferred somewhere in bulk for analysis.

The Government insists that it still has confidence in the ability of PA Consulting to carry out the sensitive work on the project, which is to include access to children’s data.

They are a bunch of computer illiterate liars who are trying to save face. That is a fact.

A DCSF spokesman confirmed: “PA Consulting is one of a number of client-side partners appointed to deliver service management to the project.

“We have confidence in PA Consulting to provide client-side services to the ContactPoint project.”

You are fools.

PA Consulting said: “PA Consulting remains confident that we can complete our work on ContactPoint.

They are delusional, and fatally over confident.

“We are one of a number of client-side providers whom DCSF has appointed to deliver specialist technical, project delivery and service management services to the ContactPoint project.

“To date no PA Consultant has had access to live ContactPoint data. In the future, access to ContactPoint data may be given to a limited number of named, security cleared and enhanced CRB checked PA consultants to carry out specific key activities (such as user acceptance testing).

And this proves that they cannot and must not be trusted. If the data is given to one named and security cleard and enhanced CRB checked PA consultant and that person has his laptop stolen with the ContactPoint database on it, then the data is out forever, full stop. No number of enhanced ‘security clearances’ or CRB checks can stop an incompetent (or unlucky) person from divulging data. The DVDRs that HM Revenue & Customs lost were lost by a CRB and enhanced security checked person and firm. This is nonsense on stilts and no one with a clue buys it for an instant.

“All access will be conducted within strict departmental audited security procedures and security procedures specific to ContactPoint. These procedures would apply equally to any other organisation who will have access to live data.”

No procedure is perfect. That is why banks still get robbed. This data will be worth BILLIONS, and as we have seen with the criminal German government who paid money to have stolen to order, the private bank details of people in Liechtenstein, there is no end that companies and governments will go to to get at valuable data. I can guarantee you that PA consulting’s offices and computers are less secure than the most secure banks; if their premises are broken into, then the Contact Point data will escape. If a hacker gets into their systems, the ContactPoint data will escape. If a careless employee is blackmailed or bribed, the ContactPoint data will escape. There is no way that they can protect this data, therefor it should not be collected and aggregated in a system like this in the first place.

PA Consulting is one of a number of companies working on ContactPoint, with most of the work being done by the IT firm Capgemini.

The same goes for Capgemini.

[…]

Telegraph

The following things must happen immediately with ContactPoint:

The database must be purged and all data dropped from all tables.

The backups must be destroyed, with certification and verification as far as possible, criminal penalties for failure to destroy.

All development contracts to fulfill work should be paid in full.

A new law forbidding any government agency from creating a database of children must be enacted, so that this and anything like it cannot possibly be restarted.

I have stipulated that the development contracts should be paid in full. This needs to be done because the incredible pressure that will be put on ministers to roll ContactPoint out simply for the money will be irresistible to the weak minded ministers who have allowed this abomination to proceed this far. Vendors are the ones who came up with this and who sold this snake oil. They have powerful lobbyists and bribery machinery to make government business happen for them; essentially, they will be bribed to back off of ContactPoint.

Finally, any firm that had been responsible for the incredible data leaks that have happened recently would be instantly fired in the business world, and there would be hellish compensation to be paid after historic lawsuits for the future damage by identity theft that would result in flagrant negligence and incompetence. Since this is a government contract however, there is no liability at all, and not only do these companies get off scott free, but they get MORE and GREATER responsibility and more money!

I’m not making this up, as you can see….astonishing!

The Telegraph is doing a very good job at staying on top of this; well done and thank you to Martin Beckford who is behind all of this good work.

How the U.S. Garrisons the Planet and Doesn’t Even Notice
By Tom Engelhardt

Here it is, as simply as I can put it: In the course of any year, there must be relatively few countries on this planet on which U.S. soldiers do not set foot, whether with guns blazing, humanitarian aid in hand, or just for a friendly visit. In startling numbers of countries, our soldiers not only arrive, but stay interminably, if not indefinitely. Sometimes they live on military bases built to the tune of billions of dollars that amount to sizeable American towns (with accompanying amenities), sometimes on stripped down forward operating bases that may not even have showers. When those troops don’t stay, often American equipment does — carefully stored for further use at tiny “cooperative security locations,” known informally as “lily pads” (from which U.S. troops, like so many frogs, could assumedly leap quickly into a region in crisis).

At the height of the Roman Empire, the Romans had an estimated 37 major military bases scattered around their dominions. At the height of the British Empire, the British had 36 of them planetwide. Depending on just who you listen to and how you count, we have hundreds of bases. According to Pentagon records, in fact, there are 761 active military “sites” abroad.

The fact is: We garrison the planet north to south, east to west, and even on the seven seas, thanks to our various fleets and our massive aircraft carriers which, with 5,000-6,000 personnel aboard — that is, the population of an American town — are functionally floating bases.

And here’s the other half of that simple truth: We don’t care to know about it. We, the American people, aided and abetted by our politicians, the Pentagon, and the mainstream media, are knee-deep in base denial.

Now, that’s the gist of it. If, like most Americans, that’s more than you care to know, stop here.

[…]

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174972/being_in_base_denial

The scale of the fall of the American Empire will be in proportion to its reach.

It will be a spectacular contraction more than the Roman Empire or any other empire in history.

The worst part about it, is that if this collapse is ugly, the idea that man can live in a free, sovereign country may be taken down with the USA.

And that would be a bad thing.

The apalling bird cage liner that is The Independent, has published a scandalous and purely evil hit piece against Home Schooling:

Across Britain, children are half-gleeful and half-groaning as they finally head back to school. But amidst the bustle of the school-run, there are tens of thousands of forgotten children who aren’t going anywhere. They are being denied an education – and set up to fail for life. The children left outside the school gates fall into four quite different groups – and each one is a scandal.

The Untaught One: the “home schooled.” Contrary to popular belief, you don’t have to send your kids to school in Britain. If you decide to keep you child indoors and uneducated, you don’t have to inform the local authority – and nobody will come looking. As a result, we have no idea how many children are kept at home. Nobody is counting. But the current estimate is 50,000. Of course, some of these kids are well-taught – but there is disturbing evidence they are a minority.

This is a lie. Everyone who knows anything about Home Schooling knows this is a lie. Perhaps this human pig hybrid thinks that only people who are ‘educated’ in the way he was are ‘well educated’. Perhaps the frankenstein that gave birth to him can provide him with some pig human hybrid children so that he can show Home Schoolers all over the world exactly how to do it. Home Schoolers are not being denied an education, they are not forgotten and they are certainly not being set up to fail for life. Whatever that means.

When the investigative journalist Rob Blackhurst journeyed into the world of British home-schooling, he discovered 12-year-old children who had not been taught to read. The most detailed survey of British parents teaching their kids at home found that 50 per cent don’t believe in teaching literacy to eight-year-olds. This leaves Britain with a weirdly divided school system. The majority of kids are constantly cooking on the SAT-grill, endlessly tested and Ofsted-ed – while this minority are totally unwatched.

Just because Rob Blackhurst finds 12 year olds that cannot read it does not follow that Home Schooling doesn’t work or is not appropriate. Were those children dyslexic, or in some other way incapable of reading? Perhaps they did not want to read? Who knows? Either way, there are children coming out of schools who are illiterate; does this mean that schools should be abandoned? Of course not, but junk journalists like this swine do not work on logic or the facts.

The only thing that matters in education, wherever or however it takes place, is whether or not the outcome is suitable for the child, and only the parents can determine this, not some beast man or Aparatchick from a Local Authority.

It is not at all weird that there are different types of education going on in a single country. Of course, idiots like this ‘journalist’ believe that there should be one system, one way and a totally uniform culture. There is a word for this. It is a nasty word, a fighting word, and it is as ugly as this article is wrongheaded.

This means children can even disappear. Seven-year-old Khyra Ishaq, who was found starved to death in her home in Birmingham earlier this year, had been withdrawn from the school system to be “home-schooled”. For precisely this reason, home-schooling is illegal in Germany.

This is another set of lies. Firstly this girl Khyra Ishaq was not a ‘Home Schooled child’ in any meaningful sense of that phrase. Her parents were not Home Schoolers. and conflating Home Schooling with this tragedy is completely absurd.

These people are nothing to do with Home Schooling whatsoever; they are freaks and anomalies and invoking them to smear Home Schoolers is the lowest form of bastardy imaginable. The millions of Home Schoolers world wide are uniformly decent. And even if there are some bad apples amongst them, all of them should not be persecuted because of that statistically insignificant minority.

Home Schooling is not banned in Germany for this reason, you ungoogling ignoramus. Home Schooling is banned in Germany because that is a fascist country, in the same way that you are a fascist. The laws banning Home Schooling date from the Nazi era, and are still on the statute books in that sad and awful country. Even the UN says that the anti Home Schooling laws there are indefensible. The stated reasons why Home Schooling is banned in Germany are:

But the court’s ruling said, instead, that schools represent society, and “it was in the children’s interest to become part of that society … The parents’ right to education did not go as far as to deprive their children of that experience.”

Government officials repeatedly have expressed a determination to stamp out “parallel societies” and that includes homeschooling. An American family of Baptist missionaries reports being threatened with deportation for homeschool, and a teenager, Melissa Busekros, eventually was returned to her family months after German authorities took her from her home and forcibly detained her in a psychiatric facility for being homeschooled.

“Even the United Nations has called on Germany to reform the way it treats homeschoolers. We appeal to the German people and German leadership to do what is right and to protect rather than attack families who choose to homeschool their children,” the HSDLA has noted.

[…]

http://irdial.com/blogdial/?p=935

So once again, this control addict pig journalist is lying through his teeth.

The HSLDA responds nicely to the German government’s argument:

To say that “the community has a justifiable interest” to “counteract the establishment of religious or other parallel societies motivated by a worldview, and to integrate minorities in this area” is not a legal justification, but is actually a purely political declaration. The politicization of the judiciary is a well-known hallmark of dictatorship. This is completely incompatible with a constitutional state. Also, this leaves aside the point that no verifiable evidence has been found to show that homeschooling in any country in the world has ever lead to a parallel society. In many large German societies such parallel societies thrive in spite of existing compulsory education.

[…]

http://www.hslda.org/hs/international/Germany/200806190.asp

The law here needs to be altered so local authorities regularly interview home-schooled kids. If they aren’t being properly taught, they should be required to enter the normal school system immediately.

[…]

The insufferably bad Independent

No, pig-man, the law does NOT need to be altered. Home Schooling is exploding and the children coming out of it are outperforming the human cattle like you who were blasted through squeeze chutes like the animal that you are.

People like you, childless busybody monsters, have no business telling any parent how to do anything. If you want to live in a society where people are completely controlled, you should go and live in a country like Saudi Arabia or Germany, where your views are shared by everyone.

WTF…YHBT!!!!11111

This article HAS to be a troll. It is just too over the top, too insane, too irrational, too stupid; no one could possibly be this thick, this uninformed, this backward. What sort of person talks about ‘normal schools’ and children being ‘properly taught’? Firstly, it is a person who refers to children as ‘kids’. Secondly, it is probably someone who does not have children. Thirdly, it is someone who is woefully ignorant.

The real reason this piece of trash is frightened of Home Schooling is not that some of them do not meet his high standards, but that so many of them EXCEED and OUTPERFORM the people who come out of ‘normal school’, creating a massive superclass of people who will snap up all the best University places and jobs.

This must be the real reason, because his flawed logic is so flawed, it begs a better explanation.

The comments on this article say it all:

I would like to point out that the 50,000 or so home educated children in Britian are the lucky ones. They are not constantly under the stress of endless tests. They are not ridiculed if learning to read does not come naturally to them at the statutory age of five. They learn from the start more like University students so that Higher Education is a breeze for them. They are not bullied by jealous classmates if they are bright. They can pursue interests such as horse riding or athletics. They make movies, they paint, they draw, they dance, they go to the beach when it is quiet, they have friends of all ages and from all social backgrounds. In short, they are a lot happier than the unfortunate children who are shut inside a huge, impersonal, and dreary comprehensive for increasingly long hours every day.

“home schooled’ = untaught?

Huh?

Doesn’t The Independent have any editors?

12 years in the home-education community and I don’t recognise any of the nonsense written here.

Do some proper research next time and we won’t laugh at you.

The law doesn’t state that every child should go to school – the law states that every child should recieve an education, which is an entirely different thing. The law doesn’t state that children must be taught to read or by what age, which is lucky for many schools. If they were truly held to account for every illiterate or innumerate 16-year-old they would have been closed down by now (and incidentally, being unable to read at 12 doesn’t mean being unable to read by 16). […]

What a TERRIBLE article. As a mum who is homeschooling my oldest 2 I find the first 4 paragraphs highly offensive. We have been homeschooling for 1 year, a decision not made lightly. We have had 1 visit from the LEA & in 6 months my children were “a year ahead”. We attend a home ed group & I can honestly say that NONE of the parents, some 13 + families, have the ideas discussed in these paragraphs, many children are further advanced than their peers in school. They are getting one to one teaching how could they fail to do well? […]

As a home educator for many years to three children who have special educational needs, I shall treat this article with the contempt it deserves.
Mr Hari, your comments are bias, ill informed, derisory and frankly lack any credibility […]

This is a disgracefully ignorant article, which supposes that all children in schools are receiving a good education. What about the programme “Last Chance Kids”, screened on Channel 4 the other night, which revealed the large numbers of children leaving primary school unable to read? They are hardly being given the education they deserve. […]

You have mixed the problems of badly behaved children, expulsions and abductions with the brave people who decide to take on home schooling.
Let’s look at the problems of bad behaviour that you mention. As you point out this bad behviour has led to expulsion. What is the cause of the bad bevahiour and why was it not addressed before the expulsion? This has nothing to do with school or home education. The fact is that today parents are no longer accountable for the behaviour of their children, nor is there an incentive for them to make sure they are well behaved. It’s the parents of badly behaved children who should be punished; these children need help – from their parents!
If more parents took their responsibilities as seriously as home-schoolers the world would be a better place for it!
Institutionalized education without choice is socialism – and today’s economic environment is proof enough that the country has had enough of that.

Outrageous and irresponsible reporting.

What an ignorant article. I’m sure that some children do slip through the net, but there are also a huge number of SEN children who also slip through the Local Authority net, as the LA are unable to or refuse to provide adequately for them. […]

Perhaps Kyra Ishaq would have been better off at school. Soham School, maybe, where she could have made friends with the lovely caretaker? Come off it! A criminal is a criminal.
Such prejudiced, distorted twaddle is not worthy of a supposedly serious newspaper. […]

What cobblers, as for quoting journalist Rob Blackhurst, I think you should really check again!

Home schoolers have a broader education than those poor children that have to sit in the unhealthy enviroment you calll a class room. […]

To be “educated” means to be “knowledgeable” “well-informed” “well-read” – clearly Mr Hari is none of these things as he would not write such an ill-informed and poorly researched paragraph about home education. Education in itself does not mean school and, sadly, school does not mean education. As a teacher I see far too many children who are failed by the school system. As a home educator I am proud to see my child thrive in the education my husband and I provide her that she would not be afforded at school. […]

Yet another negative article about home education, written by someone who knows nothing about it. […]

What an absolute load of tosh! I would expect far better from The Independent. Mr Hari needs to get his facts right. HE in Germany is not illegal for those reasons, this is legislation left over from the days of Nazi Germany. […]

Ignorant and sensationalist. Is this what passes for quality journalism here? […]

Home education was outlawed in Germany by the Nazis to ensure that all children were indoctrinated by Nazi propaganda in school.

Never did I think we’d be condoning such behaviour in this country. […]

How dare you try and associate home educated children with these other two criminally neglectful acts. You obviously don’t know what you are talking about. Maybe you were taught at a school? […]

Looks like this troll pushed all the right buttons!

As Home Schooling continues to grow and suceeed, people creatures like Pig-Man Johann will slither back under the rocks that they were born from, mainly because he will be employed by Home Schoolers who would never allow such an ill researched article go to print.

And finally from this scumbag’s own website, a list of people who hate him:

Since he began work as a journalist, Johann has been attacked in print by the National Review, the Daily Telegraph, the Daily Mail, John Pilger, Daniel Craig, Peter Oborne, Private Eye, the Socialist Worker, Cristina Odone, Jon Gaunt, the Spectator, Andrew Neil, Mark Steyn, the British National Party, Medialens, al Muhajaroun and Richard Littlejohn. ‘Prince’ Turki Al-Faisal, the Saudi Ambassador to Britain, has accused Johann of “waging a private jihad against the House of Saud”. (He’s right). Johann has been called ‘Maoist’ by Nick Cohen, “Stalinist” by Noam Chomsky, ‘Horrible Hari’ by Niall Ferguson, “an uppity little queer” by Bruce Anderson, ‘a drug addict’ by George Galloway, “fat” by the Dalai Lama and “a cunt” by Busted.

See this disgusting blob of flesh in motion.

How can I not add myself to this list of most(ly) honorable people?

This ladyboy, this motherfucking, pinko, commie, Fascist, son of a bitch, lard ass loser, chinless wonder, subhuman garbage is nothing but a ass an idiot a jackass a mooncalf a moron a nincompoop a ninny a nitwit a simpleton a softhead and a shit, and a perfect argument for abortion.

We have been thinking about the new weapon hinted at in this interview:

What could this new weapon possibly be?

If this interview is to be taken at face value, then we can work towards a reasonable guess as to what this new terror weapon is and what it can do.

If this new weapon is responsible for the assassinations that are now known to be taking place, then we can start to whittle down the features. Then we can take the interviewee saying that if knowledge of this terror weapon were to be divulged, “people might be killed”. This implies that if we know what this terror technology is, we can counter it simply by knowing how it works and that it exists. This rules out some sort of new nuclear weapon immediately, because that cannot be stopped wether you know about it or not, and certainly the people who deploy it will be immune from attack.

If we were talking about an airborne system launched from a helicopter (for example), knowing what it was would not put lives at risk. This points us to some new terror tactic that involves personnel on a close level, whereby if you knew it was coming and what to look for, the operator (murderer / terrorist) could be discovered and killed.

Now, what sort of technology would require a Manhattan Project effort, but produce something very small, small enough for a man and a small team on the ground to use?

Assuming that this secret terror tool has been used to carry out the assassinations, we can try and glean something from the merging of these assumptions.

Invoking the Manhattan Project immediately brings high energy physics to mind, or at least physics at a high level.

If we had reports of blue flashes of light just before the men were murdered, then we may infer that a new, portable particle beam weapon might be responsible. But this would not jibe well with the idea that releasing the information might put lives at risk; in any case, such a weapon could easily be fired from a helicopter or a large RPV drone; no pilots or personnel at risk.

We have had no reports of strange mutilations, burnings, incinerations, disintegrations, teleportations or anything else; all of these involve high energy physics that would require a Manhattan Project level of effort, but none of those would mean that lives would be put at risk if any of them were to be divulged.

What are we left with?

What field of physics could they have been working with, what possible breakthrough could they have made that is deployable in secret, would risk lives if it were to be divulged and which doesn’t involve death rays or any sort of bulky equipment that might give away the secret?

A highly portable, wearable invisibility cloak.

This explanation involves everything above:

If people found out about it, lives would be at risk because the enemy would be looking for signs of invisible assassins.

It is something that might take a Manhattan Project level of effort in physics to achieve.

It explains that the enemy were assassinated in an ordinary fashion, without any strange reports that would relate to high energy weaponry; in other words, the invisible assassin simply sneaks up to the enemy and snipes them from close range.

And there you have it.

Our guess is that this is a new type of invisibility tool that is unprecedented in human warfare. It is probably being worn by men who are close range snipers. To confirm this, we would need the autopsy report on the people who have been assassinated.

Or I am wrong, and its all bullshit. If I am right, then I win teh internetz.

Either way, one thing is for sure; they have expended a Manhattan Project level of money and manpower into this new weapon. What a monumental waste of human ingenuity, money and time. This ties in with the post we made about the LHC and the SSC.

As the LHC begins operations today, not only is this the beginning of an important and great experiment, it also marks the triumph of Europe over america in science.

As the world’s press is waxing lyrical about the LHC, no one is talking about the SSC, the Superconducting Super Collider, which was CANCELLED by Congress in 1993, because it was going to ‘cost too much money’.

The now abandoned SSC site in Texas

From Wikipedia:

Superconducting Super Collider
The Superconducting Super Collider (SSC) is the name of a particle accelerator that was planned to be built mostly in Waxahachie, Texas. Its planned ring circumference is 87.1 km (54 miles) and an energy of 20 TeV per beam, potentially enough energy to create a Higgs boson, a particle predicted by the Standard Model, but not yet detected. The project’s director was Roy Schwitters, a physicist at the University of Texas at Austin and Harvard University. The project was cancelled in 1993.

[…]

Cancellation

During the design and the first construction stage, a heated debate ensued about the high cost of the project. In 1987, Congress was told the project could be completed for $4.4 billion, but by 1993 the cost projection exceeded $12 billion. An especially recurrent argument was the contrast with NASA’s contribution to the International Space Station (ISS), which was of similar amount.[citation needed] Critics of the project argued that the US could not afford both of them.

The project was canceled by Congress in 1993. Many factors contributed to the shutdown of the project, although different parties disagree on which contributed the most. They include rising cost estimates, poor management by physicists and Department of Energy officials, the end of the need to prove the supremacy of American science with the collapse of the Soviet Union, belief that many smaller scientific experiments of equal merit could be funded for the same cost, Congress’s desire to generally reduce spending, and the reluctance of Texas Governor Ann Richards [1] and President Bill Clinton, both Democrats, to support a project begun during the administrations of Richards’s Republican predecessor, Bill Clements, and Clinton’s Republican predecessors, Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush. However, in 1993, Clinton attempted to prevent the cancellation by requesting that Congress continue “to support this important and challenging effort” through completion because “abandoning the SSC at this point would signal that the United States is compromising its position of leadership in basic science…” [2]

The closing of the SSC held drastic ramifications for the southern part of the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex, and resulted in a mild recession made most evident in those parts of Dallas which lay south of the Trinity River.[3] At the time the project was cancelled, 22.5 km (14 miles) of tunnel and 17 shafts to the surface were already dug and nearly two billion dollars had already been spent on the massive facility.[4]

[…]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_Super_Collider

My emphasis.

They now use the site to film ‘B’ movies. ‘Universal Soldier: The Return’ was shot there.

In case you are retarded and need reminding, this is the same government that:

• Just approved the ‘socialist’ takeover of Freedie Mac and Fannie Mae for $100 billion
• Financed (bilaterally) the illegal mass murder fests known as ‘The Iraq War’, and ‘The War in Afganistan’ at a cost of 2.4 Trillion Dollars
• Continues to pay out on the ongoing Imperial american Army that costs One Trillion Dollars each and every year.

And that is just for starters.

The SSC was cancelled because its original budget of $2 billion went to $14 billion. They stopped digging when the allocated $2 billion ran out.

Apart from the arguments against stealing from individuals to finance these projects, which do you think is better, spending TRILLIONS of dollars on mass murder and empire building and maintenance, or planning and successfully finishing the greatest single scientific experiment in the history of man so far, and all the other soul and mind expanding experiments and voyages that man needs to do to remain human?

If money is going to be stolen for a task, its far better to use it for the LHC, the space station, the missing moon and mars bases, etc, in my humble opinion.

The cancellation of the SSC and the success of the LHC is another symptom of the end of america’s greatness. In the race to build a machine that can see where no man has even seen, they failed utterly, not because they did not have the technical skill, and not because they did not have the money, but because their culture is in steep decline.

This is a culture and government that prefers to murder, to shoot bullets at men rather than shoot particles in an experiment, or men to other planets. This is a government that boasts that it has made the greatest leap forward…in how to murder people (a closely guarded secret):

while europe finances and creates the LHC, and will release the results immediately to benefit the world. And then there are the spinoff technologies of the grid computing that will eventually be made available to the public.

Europe, for all its flaws, is ascending, and america is sinking. There is no doubt about it.

america’s priorities are completely backward, the world is openly laughing at them, berating them, loathing them and their insane, pointless, inhuman warmongering and habitual irrational lying:

See Daniel Fried lie and start twitching as he does so. Pathetic and revolting in equal measure.

But I digress.

Let’s see who paid what to make this magic happen:

Cost

The total cost of the project is anticipated to be between €3.2 to €6.4 billion.[1] The construction of LHC was approved in 1995 with a budget of 2.6 billion Swiss francs (€1.6 billion), with another 210 million francs (€140 million) towards the cost of the experiments. However, cost over-runs, estimated in a major review in 2001 at around 480 million francs (€300 million) for the accelerator, and 50 million francs (€30 million) for the experiments, along with a reduction in CERN’s budget, pushed the completion date from 2005 to April 2007.[25] 180 million francs (€120 million) of the cost increase have been due to the superconducting magnets. There were also engineering difficulties encountered while building the underground cavern for the Compact Muon Solenoid. In part this was due to faulty parts loaned to CERN by fellow laboratories Argonne National Laboratory or Fermilab.[26]

[…]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider

[…]
The CERN laboratory is supported by 14 European member states that provide financial contributions based on a complex formula involving the population and gross national product of each country.

[…]

http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw72.html

• Japan has already made a generous contribution of 5 billion Yen and relations between CERN and Japan are developing well (see next heading).
• An agreement was signed in March 1996 with India providing for a contribution to the LHC accelerator with a net value for CERN of $ 12.5 million.
• An agreement was signed with Russia in June 1996 which provides for a contribution to the LHC accelerator and detectors, each with net values for CERN of 67 million Swiss Francs.
• An agreement has been signed with Canada, allowing for an in-kind contribution to the LHC with a value of $ 30 million Canadian.
• As a result of the negotiations which have taken place with CERN and US officials, Council approved the text of a cooperation agreement outlining a contribution to the LHC accelerator from the Department of Energy (DOE) and a contribution from the DOE and the National Science Foundation (NSF) to the ATLAS and CMS experiments, totalling $530 million.

[…]

CERN

This further demonstrates the priorities of the mass murdering empire builders…not that we really require further proof. Japan donates $5 BILLION, america, $500,000. Even India managed to donate $12.5 million, and they have alot of domestic problems to see to.

This is the true measure by which we can assess the decline of america.

We should take heart that at least somewhere in the world, the true human spirit is alive and well. China is taking steps to get into space in a significant way, even India with its tight belt is pointing in the right direction…it looks like america has seen its best days…unless they decide to pull out and share their REAL secret weapon, and we all know what that is, and where its kept. Even if they did, it would not be something that they made out of a pure heart, but something they stole.

File under ‘how the mighty fall’.

UPDATE!

An intelligence forecast being prepared for the next president on future global risks envisions a steady decline in U.S. dominance in the coming decades, as the world is reshaped by globalization, battered by climate change, and destabilized by regional upheavals over shortages of food, water and energy.

The report, previewed in a speech by Thomas Fingar, the U.S. intelligence community’s top analyst, also concludes that the one key area of continued U.S. superiority — military power — will “be the least significant” asset in the increasingly competitive world of the future, because “nobody is going to attack us with massive conventional force.”

Fingar’s remarks last week were based on a partially completed “Global Trends 2025” report that assesses how international events could affect the United States in the next 15 to 17 years. Speaking at a conference of intelligence professionals in Orlando, Fingar gave an overview of key findings that he said will be presented to the next occupant of the White House early in the new year.

“The U.S. will remain the preeminent power, but that American dominance will be much diminished,” Fingar said, according to a transcript of the Thursday speech. He saw U.S. leadership eroding “at an accelerating pace” in “political, economic and arguably, cultural arenas.”

[…]

Washington Post

From every angle, its over.

Andy Burnham, fascist, liar and traitor said that:

Suggesting the Government will have knowledge of, and control over, your life through the National Identity Register is untrue. It is also nonsense to suggest either that “every outpost of the state” or private enterprises will have access to the register.

[…]

http://irdial.com/blogdial/?p=156

and

His (Henry Porter’s) article swallows the contents of a ridiculous, anonymous email and unquestioningly regurgitates it. The scheme will not track your life’s activities. ID cards will be used when it is important to verify identity.

[…]

http://irdial.com/blogdial/?p=142

Now it emerges that not only is everything that Andy Burnham said about the NIR and ID cards a total lie, but that the EU knew it, and had been planning to capture everything about everyone. We were right and he has been proven to be a liar:

New Statewatch Report: Embargoed until 00:01, Thursday 11 September 2008

The Shape of Things to Come by Tony Bunyan

The EU is currently developing a new five year strategy for justice and home affairs and security policy for 2009-2014. The proposals set out by the shadowy “Future Group” set up by the Council of the European Union include a range of highly controversial measures including new technologies of surveillance, enhanced cooperation with the United States and harnessing the “digital tsunami”. In the words of the EU Council presidency:

“Every object the individual uses, every transaction they make and almost everywhere they go will create a detailed digital record. This will generate a wealth of information for public security organisations, and create huge opportunities for more effective and productive public security efforts.”

Seven years on from 11 September 2001 and the launch of the “war on terorism” this major new report The Shape of Things to come (60 pages) examines the proposals of the Future Group and their effect on civil liberties. It shows how European governments and EU policy-makers are pursuing unfettered powers to access and gather masses of personal data on the everyday life of everyone – on the grounds that we can all be safe and secure from perceived “threats”.

The Statewatch report calls for a “meaningful and wide-ranging debate” before it is “too late” for privacy and civil liberties.

Press release (pdf)
Eight page Conclusions (pdf)
Copy of full report (pdf)

For further information:
00 44 208 802 1882
e-mail: office@statewatch.org

And there you have it.

“Every object that the individual uses, every transaction they make and almost everywhere they go will create a detailed digital record.”

We have detailed how all of this will be done before on BLOGDIAL, and of course, much of this was accurately predicted in the ‘Frances Stonor Saunders’ email from 2006.

• They will know what objects you have because each store receipt will have your ID attached to it, and the state will have access to the store’s database of all purchases.
• They will know each and every transaction you make, no matter how small, because cash transactions will be outlawed and replaced by Oyster like systems..
• They will know everywhere you go because you will use an Oyster or its decedents to go on public transport or trains, your car will be tracked every mile by GPS and or ANPR and CCTV will watch you while you walk.
• They will know everywhere you fly because the airlines will capture information about you and pass it to them.
• They will know every border you cross because your passport data will be captured.

And of course, they will know everything about your medical history, in intimate detail.

There is no technical reason why they cannot do all of this. The only reason why they will not be able to do it is if there is public opposition. Of course, the elite security services will put together a covert system that will do all of this and more outside the scope of the law, but that is not our worry; these measures have nothing to do with ‘security’, which is now the word they are slowly using in place of ‘terrorism’ since it is becoming widely understood that none of these measures can stop ‘terrorists’. These measures are designed to exert total surveillance and control over the ordinary individual, with a special focus on financial transactions.

I say control because the state will be able to turn ‘your’ identity off with a few clicks of a mouse, making it impossible for you to exist.

Imagine a world where there is no cash. You will not be able to even beg on the streets for money should the state freeze your bank account. You will not be able to travel anywhere, go on the internet (which will require you to ‘swipe in’ to log on). You will become a non person, cut off from society, made desperate…and easy to persuade.

Once this happens to a few people, and news about it spreads, a wave of deeply seated fear will spread over the civilized world like a black fog. No one will dare say or do anything out of line for fear of being handed the death sentence of ‘ID Death’.

As we have seen in Great Britain, there is nothing and no place that they will not consider their domain, from how you plant your garden, to what and how much you eat, to how you dispose of your garbage, they will be there, watching you, controlling you and fining you for the smallest infraction. That is what they will add to the mix. The Germans will bring their obsessive need to control thought to the table. The worst aspects of every nation will be brought to bear on everyone; this will be the greatest nightmare ever faced by any generation of human beings in their short history.

I say their because if no one stands up to this, if everyone accepts this without even a stone being thrown then I cannot consider myself to be one of those ‘human beings’ that would willingly put their heads into a noose without so much as a word.

But I digress.

We have an anti Police State policy whereby we do not cooperate with any police state measure, and do anything we can to stop it. Just recently when someone asked me to produce my passport to complete a transaction, I refused. A few weeks later when another person asked for that same document, I refused again. I will not show my passport at any place other than a border. I will not show my driver’s license anywhere except when I am getting a ticket for speeding or some other car related event. I will refuse every time, without exception. I will not pay any fine that is generated by the Police State system. I will not respond to anything generated by it.

Now.

If four fifths of all adults in the UK did this, the system would utterly collapse. I imagine that something like this will happen eventually, and hopefully sooner rather than later. It is the only way that it can be destroyed utterly; by denying it the food it needs to survive; compliance. BLOGDIAL readers know that demonstrations, petitions and Chakrabarti posturing will not do anything to stop this. Only massive refusal to obey will stop it in its tracks. This refusal must be carried out with business, because it is they who actually operate the majority of the system on a day to day basis. They swipe everyone’s cards, they provide back door access to their databases. The state alone has no apparatus to do the majority of the work. Their single greatest point of direct access and contact is at the borders – other than that, they are nothing but desk bound creatures shuffling between meetings and lunches while they delegate the dirty work to the public.

This can and will be stopped. The Soviet Union no longer exists, and neither does PanAM. Nelson Mandela got out of gaol and became president of South Africa Both of those institutions and that man and his countrymen’s situations seemed unassailable, unchangeable and the pillars of reality. Now all of it is gone, and we lived to see it.

We will live to see the total destruction of the Police State. It will either happen before it starts or after it is entrenched. Either way, it will end and the subhuman monsters that are bringing it about will be consigned to the ranks of the forgotten. No one will remember Andy Burnham in the future. His worthless, meaningless life and the lives of his co conspirators will be washed away as we move to a future where people like that, pure evil, are rendered powerless to hatch their vile schemes on the good people of civilization.

The Express has a front page story detailing government proposals to require that you seek planning permission in order to grow plants in your own garden:

AN army of town hall snoopers could soon be telling people what they can and cannot grow in their gardens.
Fast-growing plants and even lawns could be banned, under Labour’s latest environmental blitz.

People would be forced to get planning permission to make changes in their gardens in order to help the Government hit its targets for reducing waste.

Last night Bob Neill, the Tories’ local government spokesman, blasted the proposal. “This is utter nonsense,” he said. “Are they really expecting hardworking people to go along to the council to get building regulation consent to plant their rhododendrons?

“This is another example of the heavy hand of Labour needlessly meddling in people’s lives.”

The astonishing measures are put forward in a policy document commissioned by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Some lawns could be banned because eco-experts claim that “mulched gardens” are better for the environment.

They say that lawns need extensive watering and people toss cut grass in with normal household waste.

Gardeners would also be told to avoid plants that need a lot of water.

Backbench Tory MP Philip Davies said: “I am gobsmacked that this is something the Government thinks is worth wasting their time with.

“They should be concerned with saving gardens by stopping developments being built on them, not intruding further into people’s private lives.

“If this is what Gordon Brown’s latest relaunch amounts to, then God help us all.” Doretta Cocks, of the Campaign for Weekly Waste Collection, said: “We have already got too many officials allowed to invade people’s homes.

“It is dreadful to think that they are going to start spying on gardens as well.”

Mark Wallace, of the TaxPayers’ Alliance campaign group, said: “The Government and town hall officials should realise by now that they are not doing their basic jobs properly, so there is no way they should poke their nose into the design of our flower-beds.

“The last thing people need is more busybodies bossing people about.”

[…]

http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/60549

and an opinion piece:

THE idea that town hall snoops should acquire powers to vet what plants people grow in their gardens is the latest suggestion from the eco-fascist movement which is destroying freedom in Britain.
It should surprise nobody that those putting forward this preposterous plan do so on the basis that it could allegedly help to reduce household waste.

The people who do not want to empty your bins have entered the business of telling you what should be in your back yard.

Naturally enough they approve of plants which like dry conditions but disapprove of those which need regular watering.

Only in a nation where officialdom has inverted its proper role of serving the public could such suggestions make it into the policy documents of government departments.

Under Labour, state commissars have come to believe their proper station is to be masters of the people rather than servants.

The British public are known for regarding their homes as their castles but they are equally proprietorial about their gardens.

In our increasingly overcrowded island a patch of private outside space presents many people with a rare opportunity to assert their individuality.

Any politician – local or national – who seeks to exert state control over such terrain will surely be drummed out of office.

There is an old nursery rhyme that poses the question: “How does your garden grow?” Municipal snoopers who make such inquiries in the future should not expect to receive a detailed list of items but instead to be given the curt reply: Mind your own business.

[…]

http://www.express.co.uk/ourcomments/view/60602/Municipal-snoopers-have-no-place-in-our-gardens

What is missing here, firstly is a proper ending to the opinion piece. It should have ended, “…curt reply: Over my dead body you son of a bitch.”

The other, more important point that the Express completely fails to address is the fact that they approve of the government outlawing the growing of other plants. They already heartily approve of the outlawing of marijuana, and if they accept that precedent, then it is completely logical to allow the government to tell you what other plants you should or should not grow.

The principle is very clear; as soon as you let the state govern you in one aspect of your life, they will seek to govern you in all aspects. There is no reason why you should not be able to grow any plant (that is naturally occurring) on your own land. You have the absolute right to do that, and then to make any preparation from those plants that you like for any application that you like, as long as you are not harming anyone else. That is why Genetically Modified plants cannot be grown on your own land, because bees will pollinate your clean plants with the frankenstein pollen from the GM crops, doing harm to your property.

The Express cannot reasonably complain about this. They are FOR the state controlling your garden for plants that they do not like, but AGAINST the state controlling plants that they do like. This is illogically. Either you accept the state’s authority to tell you what you can and cannot plant in all instances where your garden doesn’t harm anyone else, or you accept that you have no rights at all on your own land, and submit completely.

They are now way down the roller-coaster of their own destruction thanks to their own unthinking stance towards liberty, and sadly, wen confronted by the monsters they have created, all they can do is give a limp wristed, milk blooded response.

The Germans do not like ‘Der Google’:

The Federal Office for Information Security warned Internet users of the new browser Chrome. The application by the company Google should not be used for surfing the Internet, as a spokesperson for the office told the Berliner Zeitung. It was said to be problematic that Chrome was distributed as an unfinished advance version. Furthermore it was said to be risky that user data is hoarded with a single vendor. With its search engine, email program and the new browser, Google now covers all important areas on the Internet.

This is so absurd its laughable, and I would laugh if it wasn’t so serious.

These idiots are warning Germans not to use Chrome to surf the internet (wtf else is it for?) because it is unfinished. Guess what you morons: all software is unfinished by nature. It remains unfinished because:

• users expectations are not static
• operating systems are not static
• competition is not static
• security issues are not static

Anyone with experience in software will be aware of this, and certainly anyone who calls themselves an expert will know this. Perhaps that is why a government agency has come out with such a completely stupid statement.

Finally, they shoot themselves in the foot with the final part of this farcical bullshit.

If it is ‘risky that user data is hoarded with a single vendor’, then it is also risky that user data, citizen data, is hoarded by a single vendor: THE GERMAN GOVERNMENT.

OR ANY GOVERNMENT for that matter.

Certainly, no government that can put out a statement like this should be trusted with an empty USB key, let alone the private data of millions of Germans, since they are obviously computer illiterate. Can you imagine these same people in charge of all ID card data, all passport data, medical data, and all other private data to do with the German people? It is unthinkable, even without knowing how stupid and incompetent they are.

As for Google covering all important areas of teh internetz, this is just total nonsense. You can choose any number of other services for search, email and everything else. You can sign up for Google services under any name that you like, multiple times. You can encrypt the data you store on Google’s servers so they they cannot read it. You can delete your account at any time. Google Chrome is even beginning to address the coming privacy backlash by having a primitive private browsing mode built into Chrome.

Compare this with the German Government:

• COMPULSORY ID card
• COMPULSORY school
• COMPULSORY single identity
• COMPULSORY single vendor
• NO LIABILITY if they destroy your life accidentally through negligence
• NO COMPENSATION if they destroy your life

and if you disobey them, they DESTROY YOUR LIFE with police and financial ruin.

In every way, even if Google were as evil as Micro$oft, any sensible person would choose to have their identity and all the services listed above handled by Google rather than the German government. With Google you are a customer, not a servant, and of course, Google doesn’t tax you.

In any case, what are the risks this spokesperson talks of? Its the German government that is snooping into people’s emails, not Google; surely he should be FOR Google taking everything to make his STASIesque job easier. Remember, this is the same criminal German government that conspired and had stolen to order the details of bank accounts from a sovereign country; a criminal act of international espionage and base theft of the kind that ‘organized crime’ does:

One German politician is unapologetic, and deserves credit for at least stating the matter bluntly: “[That this was illegal] is irrelevant. What Germany will do is confront every tax suspect with the option of whether they want to drop their trousers and cooperate or possibly go to jail.”

These people are bastards. They are also illogical. There are no two ways about it. What makes it worse is that they are illogical bastards, dirty criminals, liars and thieves.

The Telegraph has a piece about ‘zero immigration’ where people will be ‘counted in and counted out’ and for every one person allowed in, one has to come out.

This is of course, unworkable, and cannot be done without serious consequences that will end up changing everything about Britain.

Lets look at some scenarios.

Imagine that there is a one in one out (OIOO…its binary…how fitting!) policy. The only way to make it work is to give everyone a number and then identify them uniquely. That means NIR and ID cards. That means watching everyone, forbidding anyone who is in the UK illegally from being able to exist. The NIR has all of this built in, and once you cannot operate a bank account or buy food without an ID card, coming here illegally will be a non starter.

The Telegraph is against ID cards, or so we thought. This OIOO policy is the ultimate means to an end justifying ID cards.

Imagine this also; you live in an OIOO country, and over a period of ten years a new technology emerges that literally changes the whole world – how the world spends money, learns, communicates – EVERYTHING.

Imagine now, that there is a shortage of workers who can operate this new technology, which we will call ‘the internet’ for sake of argument. If there is a OIOO policy in place, and all the workers who know how to work this complex technology live outside the UK, and this new ‘internet’ is crucial to the functioning of all countries, then Britain will be in big trouble, because no one is going to voluntarily leave the UK so that 10,000 people can enter and run the new fantastic tool, brining all the unintended and desired technologies with it and the ancillary jobs that inevitably grow like cultures around any new technology. And if you are going to make exceptions for skilled workers, they will have children and add to the numbers living here.

In the case above, training will not bring your local workers up to speed quickly enough. Only people who know how to work this new magic NOW can bring the benefits NOW and keep Britain in front of the pack for decades to come.

Obviously I am using the internet as a device to illustrate the point, but one thing is for sure, there will be new technologies and unless Britain wants to be left out, it is going to have to make exceptions for highly skilled people that it can no longer produce. OIOO cannot be taken at face value as a ‘final solution to the immigration problem’.

The other crucial flaw in this OIOO idea is that the number of people already in the UK is growing thanks to childbirth. Even if you ‘go OIOO’, Britain will be overpopulated (I mean MORE overpopulated) by virtue of that fact alone.

The logical, inevitable conclusion to this line of thought is to have a number set by government beyond which the population of Britain is not allowed to go, and then to say OIOO, where ‘OIOO’ means for every exit or death in the UK, one person can come in, AFTER licensed births have taken place. Thats right, all birth would be subject to a government issued license, and couples would only be able to have a child if someone died, and then there would be a queue to join…or perhaps, it would be done by lottery, the winning ticked salable on the open market. There would be stiff penalties for those who disobey, just like there are in Fortress. This would mean an end to immigration altogether and the introduction of a nightmare beyond the imagining of most ordinary people. Of course, all rich people, skilled people, people with common sense and intelligence would leave Britain, making life even more intolerable. Of course, these rich, smart people would be welcomed anywhere in the world that they wanted to go, and they would be enticed with licenses for multiple birth (in countries that adopt OIOO) and failing that, they would go to places where there are no restriction on the number of children you can have. Either way, Britain would suffer the ultimate, final brain drain, and the only children left behind would be obese, drooling, cheeseburger chasing monsters with slicked back hair, wearing garish shell suits, writing textlish (text messaging english) and barking with hoarse voices.

Like I said about the fake Romany marriage outrage story, everyone should be VERY careful about stories and measures to fix problems; the solutions can come back to bite you and destroy the very thing you are so eager to protect.

Finally, all of this is moot as long as Britain is in the EU. EU membership means that anyone from the member countries can come and live here permanently and there is nothing anyone can do to stop it. You cannot address this ‘problem of immigration’ without first addressing that.