Israeli F-16 bombers kill over a hundred Palestinians

27 12 2008

Vodpod videos no longer available.


Social-ecological catastrophe in Tennessee, US

24 12 2008

Democracy Now and The Tenessean have reported a major disaster at a coal-fired power station in Tennessee, US. A dyke that held back a forty-acre retention pond containing toxic coal ash collapsed spilling millions of gallons (enough to fill 558 Olympic-size swimming pools) of sludge across a wetland landscape. The spill has engulfed hundreds of acres in upto four feet of sludge, surrounding twelve households. The Emory river has also been heavily polluted. The coal ash itself contains neurotoxic and carcinogenic heavy metals (arsenic, mercury, lead, cadmium and chromium) that will likely effect species and human health in the region for years. The US corporate media is ignoring the incident.

Update: The New York Times has a graphic of the affected area.





Nixon and Kissinger transcripts released

24 12 2008

The transcript of the April 15, 1972, phone conversation is one of over 15 500 documents in a unique, comprehensively-indexed set of the telephone conversations of Henry A. Kissinger—perhaps the most famous and controversial U.S. official of the second half of the 20th century. Unbeknownst to the rest of the U.S. government, Kissinger secretly taped his incoming and outgoing phone conversations and had his secretary transcribe them. After destroying the tapes, Kissinger took the transcripts with him when he left office in January 1977, claiming they were “private papers.” In 2001, the National Security Archive initiated legal proceedings to force the government to recover the telcons, and used the freedom of information act to obtain the declassification of most of them. After a three year project to catalogue and index the transcripts, which total over 30,000 pages, this on-line collection was published by the Digital National Security Archive (ProQuest) this week.

The President/Mr. Kissinger 11:30 — April 15, 1972


Well, they are just reporting it — it’s just the first wave there. It’s wave after wave of planes. You see, they can’t see the B-52 and they dropped a million pounds of bombs…


That shock treatment of cracking them. The only thing I regret is that when we made this plan, we didn’t take out the power plants. The power plants, that can really demoralize a person.

“A casualty of Watergate”

Kissinger/Reston 4:30 p.m. — April 16 1975


The big problem we have now is to change the world – there is nothing we can do about the world’s perception of Vietnam, but there is a lot we can do about changing the world’s perception about our reaction to it and that is our big problem right now.


Well, sure but it is a perception of ours and what we are and what we stand for.

— —

If you havn’t seen it, there is an interesting documentary called “The Trials of Henry Kissinger” by Christopher Hitchens that examines evidence of Kissinger’s involvement with war crimes perpetrated in Indochina, Bangladesh, Chile, Cyprus and East Timor.

Fading freedom in the British police state.

17 12 2008

The Take

Our state hates the idea of individual liberty. As the years of the Labour government have progressed we have seen the steady deployment of various technological tools that surveill the people. The following is a list of some already implemented and proposed laws and projects that strengthen the power of the state, take freedom and impose on the individual’s right to privacy.

Terrorism Act 2006 (imposed a 28 day limit on detention without charge).

Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (allows the police to stop and search anyone in a specific area).

Civil Contingencies Act 2004 (gives Cabinet ministers sweeping powers in designated emergencies including quarantine areas, restricting travel, handing control of essential industries to the army).

Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (restricts the right to demonstrate within an exclusion zone of up to one kilometre from any point in Parliament Square).

Identity Card Act 2006 (proposed 2010 implementation of ID cards for airport workers and nationwide in 2011).

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (allows the government to access a person’s electronic communications).

● Coroners and Justice Bill (proposed, will remove existing legal barriers to data sharing).

Communications Data Bill (postponed, will monitor web comms using Internet Deep Packet Inspection (DPI), as well as telephone calls).

● DNA database (5.3 million profiles, many not convicted, although just denounced as unlawful by the European court of human rights).

● NHS central medical records database called Secondary Uses Service (SUS).

ContactPoint National child database (proposed directory that will hold information on all children under 18).

4 million CCTV cameras.

Automatic Number Plate Recognition CCTV cameras linked to police national computer.

● Spy drones (have been used in Merseyside, Liverpool and at V festival).

Mobile fingerprint and face recognition scanners (proposed use within 18 months).

Fingerprinting students from outside Europe (proposed to start in autumn 2009).

10,000 Taser stun guns available to police officers across England and Wales (BBC link).

Metropolitan Police’s Form 696 (proposed, requires venues and club managers in London to report to the police the names, addresses, aliases and telephone numbers of artists).

These tools of privacy invasion and “terrorism” evasion are trampling all over rights hard-won, often at the expensive of freedom and life (by people like John Lilburne, John Wilkes, Tom Paine, John Stuart Mill and Ernest Jones), from tyrannous monarchs and governments over hundreds of years. For anyone who values a life free from state monitoring and interference, these projects are an act of complete contempt. But what motivates the government into implementing them and what do they mean for the distribution of political power in our so-called democracy?

Enshrined in law

We first have to look at why in any democratic country an individual would have his or her liberty taken away from them for legitimate reasons. Above all, individuals should be protected from arbitrary state power through habeas corpus, which states that:

“No free man shall be arrested, or imprisoned, or deprived of his property, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any way destroyed, nor shall we go against him or send against him, unless by legal judgement of his peers, or by the law of the land.”

So, if a court judges, beyond reasonable doubt, that a person has broken the law they can be imprisoned for a specified amount of time. Property aside, the most legitimate reason for someone to be imprisoned would be through the encroachment on an individual’s right to be free from violence and murder. The state is seen as having the responsibility to protect its citizens from such acts and this is widely accepted. However, as terrorist acts have been perpetrated and the perceived threat of terrorism has grown, the government has created new laws that give itself more powers to detain and monitor the citizenry. The justification of these laws has been that terrorism and crime in the twenty first century has evolved and its prevention outweighs the individual’s right to liberty. In the words of Tony Blair:

“Ultimately, for me this whole issue is not about whether we care about civil liberties, but how we care for them in the modern world. If the traditional processes were the answer to these crime and law and order problems…then we wouldn’t be having this debate. But they’re not. They’ve failed. They are leaving the innocent unprotected and the guilty unpunished. That’s why we need them changed.” (1)

Of course, surveillance might reduce crime (although evidence points to the contrary) but it comes at cost, in trading freedom for security, the state is completely upsetting the balance between crime prevention and civil liberty. It’s a response characteristic across much of government’s policy making, they attempt to command and control instead of tackling the roots of social and environmental problems. Crime results from a huge complex of social factors and the policy of punishment has just not worked, prisons are overflowing. Twenty first century terrorism has emerged in response to US and British support for Israel and general endeavours for military dominance in the Middle East. These laws and databases are another attempt to control our behaviour instead of concentrating on the causes of these behaviours in the first place and the entire population is paying the price.

Media and the minority for the majority

We are in a situation in which Britain has the weakest possible form of democracy, representative in nature and where the electorate has entrusted the political elite to serve in its interests. With this mandated power the state is using its authority to create a sophisticated and wide ranging system that will act as a window into our lives. You would think that the citizenry would overwhelmingly oppose such authoritarian advances, until now confined to our imaginations through the pages of dystopian (a term in fact first used is this context by John Stuart Mill) novels.

If polls are anything to go by. On the issue of identity cards, two have been carried out. One by the Home Office that found 60% of people were in favour of the scheme and one by the ICM that found 50% of people against (2). The differing results possibly arising from the kind of questions being asked in each poll. Still, there is by no means a majority opposing the scheme, this is worrying, why would people willingly give up their freedom and privacy?

If we turn to the media there is a mixed picture. It’s apparent that tabloids and broads alike have been quite critical of the identity card project. This has been combined with considerable attention on the broader civil liberty issues of privacy and mass surveillance, although by no means widespread. Covered on the right by Philip Johnston and on the left by Henry Porter, in addition to a number of reports, documentaries and inquiries.

Despite this coverage, the media has used crime and terror ‘infotainment’ to sell papers and in turn generate an up welling of fear and distrust. Creating a culture in which people perceive crime and terrorism as a greater threat to their safety than it in reality does (3). This would motivate a want for expanded state powers to create a feeling of security. Papers not only shape thoughts, they also have an enormous influence on government policy. Instead of using credible research the focus is on policy that responds to headlines and uses spin tactics to manipulate public opinion (3). Undermining the democratic function the media should be performing.

It’s worth wondering, do you reform the system or shift to a new set of political structures? Is the state of liberty in Britain linked to a general depoliticisation of the nation and the spread of apathy?

Disinterest in the political system fuels a situation in which people, distracted by consumerism, don’t want to participate in making decisions that affect their lives. Or if they do want to make decisions for themselves they are disempowered and can’t voice their opinions other than in governmental consultations that are nothing more than token gestures. Further, the centralised bureaucracy that is the state, in essence, provides an infrastructure that allows for the effortless concentration and sharing of information and data. In a participatory political system, these departments of control would not have to exist to such a large scale, with citizens making direct decisions (through local meetings or even the internet). If people are not directly involved in decision-making, protest is often a frequently sought means to show dissatisfaction. But when these do occur, they are often small, rare and of course repressed.

Stifling discontent

Athens, the birthplace of democracy, was recently in the crux of a civil crisis and the streets were alive with discontent. The unjust shooting of Alexandros Grigoropoulos was a catalyst, people were sick of a government that had paid them little attention. This outburst of energy was a visual, although somewhat violent, display through which the Greek youth empowered themselves. While the streets have been buzzing with rage, the only means the Greek police have had to control the situation has been through repression/brutality on the front lines.

Imagine a similar situation in Britain – but it’s 2025 and the state has increasingly become more and more authoritarian to the point that the general election has almost lost all meaning. There is an established network of face recognition and Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) CCTV cameras. Communications are meticulously monitored. Various databases provide details on individual’s political views. ID cards contain radio-frequency identification chips that are read by ubiquitous scanners around urban areas and it is illegal to protest in city centres. People are angry and want to make the state take notice and relinquish power. A mass demonstration is organised to take place in London.

The ANPR will allow the tracking of protester’s vehicles, allowing police to intercept or harass them. ID cards will be needed to gain access to public transport and profiling will restrict access. Face recognition cameras will identify people in the streets and allow their subsequent arrest. And, who knows how else the surveillance system could be adapted to varying police demands? The Identity Card Act itself does not restrict the functional scope of the project, which could be much greater than that originally publicised by the government. The powers of the state could extend far beyond the front lines and repression and exclusion would embed deeply into the fabric of society.

Her Majesty’s National Prison

A ‘maximum security society’ is just not acceptable for the functioning of any kind of democracy. I have argued that this consolidation of power is yet another symptom of the type of political system we use in this country. But we cannot forget other arenas of political and social consequence that would form in this liberty devoid Britain – discrimination – choice and consent – anonymity – boundaries between commercial, public and state databases – identity errors – stolen private data – financial cost – trust.

What is at our immediate disposal to counteract this assault on freedom and begin breaking down the walls of this national prison? The internet is a medium bustling with news articles, critical blogs, essays and reports on the taking of liberty that can raise awareness on the issues. And fundamentally, it circumvents the distortions of reality found in the media. Mass civil disobedience on identity cards would be an extremely powerful act and even some MP’s have already claimed they will not bow to state coercion on the matter. Expression through protests could elevate public consciousness and possibly influence the government. Surveillance Impact Assessments (SIA), have been proposed by The Surveillance Studies Network as a legislative means to examine any adverse effects a law or project would have on individual privacy and society as a whole. If it’s orientation we seek, ‘The Convention on Modern Liberty‘ scheduled for 28th February will provide the opportunity to hear various politicians, lawyers, journalists and scientists discuss the threats to our fundamental rights and freedoms. Furthermore, I believe the potential power for real change in government policy on this issue comes from the fact that it transcends the political ideologies of left and right.

Read the rest of this entry »

Greek Rebellion

17 12 2008

Here are a few photos of the recent demonstrations and riots in Athens that were catalysed my the police murder of a teenager, Alexandros Grigoropoulos.









Uncertainity, choice, catastrophic change and feedbacks.

12 12 2008

A really good animation created by Plane Stupid‘s Leo Murray that explores a bit of the science behind climate change. He provides an explanation of the concepts of stable states, critical thresholds and positive feedbacks. Concepts that extend from the garden pond to the biosphere and global climate system.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Greg Craven presents a good argument about dealing with uncertainty and climate change.

Subverting democracy in Britain.

3 12 2008

Henry Porter fills us in on the latest subversion of democracy. Quite Stasi-esque don’t you think?

“How is Britain to mark the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?

With the continued development of £12bn plans to set up a vast data silo to store information on all phone calls, emails and internet connections? Another soviet style article form Jack Straw, which tells us how the inventory of freedoms has increased under Labour? Or the issue of ID cards to foreigners by a government that knows the public don’t give a damn about the rights and privacy of foreigners?

Somehow we always knew that Jacqui Smith would be at the centre of this important anniversary but you have to hand it to the government: nobody had predicted that human rights and freedom in Britain would be celebrated with the arrest and fingerprinting of an opposition MP by terror police, the search of his premises, hard drives and telephones, the taking of his DNA and the attempted intimidation of his wife, Alicia.

No action by the authorities could have better revealed the decay in the chassis of parliamentary democracy. It captures everything – the seeming politicisation of the police, the unprincipled brass neck of the home secretary, the degradation and failure of the parliamentary authorities and the growing confusion in labour between the roles of the government and state.

Jacqui Smith has been busy saying that she knew nothing of the operation before it took place and that she adhered to the principle that the police should be allowed to pursue the investigation without political interference. But then under pressure she has begun to hint of a dark interior to this scandal, a conspiracy to distort the political process. She can’t have it both ways. Either she did know about the operation, in which case she should resign, or she didn’t, in which case she should keep quiet on the purpose of the investigation.

My guess is that she didn’t have to know about the arrest: she could rely on the anti-terror chief Bob Quick to serve the government’s interests because he so desperately wants Sir Ian Blair’s job. And we should not forget that the home secretary has just given the police a Christmas present of 10,000 Taser guns. Labour loves a uniform – especially one that is armed.

This episode should not be allowed to die. It symbolises the attack on parliament started under Tony Blair, who never had any love or understanding of the place. It is now time for parliament to reassert itself. One way to do that is to call for the impeachment of those involved. The threat alone would restore some of the power that has ebbed from parliament over the last dozen or so years.

What we should take away from the arrest of Damian Green are the following.

Terror police were used on an inquiry that involved neither threat to public safety nor a breach of the Official Secrets Act. That is the definition of function creep and it is an abuse of special tactics and powers.

The authorities are suspected of bugging MPs – the Conservatives are having their offices swept. Whether they are being bugged or not, we should note that the police seized all Damian Green’s digital equipment and are busily copying his communications and contacts. If they are prepared to do this without a charge being laid then we must assume that government surveillance will one day include anyone who threatens its interests. It may already include journalists and activists who are opposed to its policies. It will certainly do so if Jacqui Smith’s proposals to collect all our communications data go ahead.

And finally we should not forget that the slide in the quality of democracy and the erosion of liberty in Britain have been allowed to take place by MPs and many journalists who simply averted their gaze. As the News of the World pointed out yesterday, “This is how British liberties are destroyed. Not by a conniving, cat-stroking prime minister. But by lack of attention.” If Rupert Murdoch’s newspaper can see what has happening so should all Labour’s friends in the liberal press who have been in a state of denial.”

Update: ‘Last week, a dear friend of freedom was laid to rest’.