March 2009

To be honest, Yokel hasn't got the stamina for a "big write" this weekend. It is, after all the dreaded "month end", followed by the even more dreaded "year end". And given what the G20 and its hangers on are up to this coming week, perhaps it is even ... But that is for a later paragraph.

Firstly, Yokel wishes to express his sympathy to the residents of the Falkland Islands as they contemplate the name change to the Malvinas, and to a new set of masters. For Mr Gordon (Jonah) Brown is on his travels around South America to drum up a bit of support for his crackpot ideas ahead of the G20 meeting in London this week. In the course of those travels he is credited by Sky with saying that the Falkland Islanders "are a proud and strong community and they have my total support and respect." Identical words in Pravda, so it must be a press release. That's done it for them! Given what happens whenever Jonah Brown pops up and expresses his support for, or admiration of, any organisation or person, trouble strikes. In this case, transfer of sovereignty within 18 months, then Jonah can brag about it as one of his foreign policy successes during the next election campaign.

Of course the other way of looking at it is the "never believe it until it is denied" approach. So here, in sentences that seem very clear, Gordon Brown is denying what quite a few have known for years: that NuLabour have just been waiting their chance to undo "Maggie's Victory", and to give the Falkland Islands to Argentina on a plate, against the wishes of the Islanders. So it must be true.

---

Second is an example of the law of unintended consequences. As smokestack industries fade away in our bright new technological future, we must be putting less muck into the atmosphere. That must surely be a good thing, mustn't it? Well, not exactly! It seems that less dust in the atmosphere means more of the Sun's energy reaches the oceans, and causes their temperature to rise. And that most of the actual observed/measured temperature rise (as opposed to the manipulated data hype that does the rounds) is from this cause, not CO2!

---

Lastly of course is the dread that is consuming Yokel at the moment. That the idiots who think that rioting is fun, possibly egged on by the state's agents provocateurs, will succeed this week in giving Gordon his excuse to bring the Civil Contingencies Act into force. Cabinet Office commentary about the Act is here. Allied with the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act that is already in force, that will bring about something akin to martial law or to a police state. Why should Yokel worry about month end and year end when we might be a few short steps away from the end of the rule of common law?

As Leg-Iron has said, "don't riot, its what they want".

Yokel cannot understand why this matter has not yet hit the headlines, but it really seems that we are into the second phase of the programme to withdraw the humble cheque (bank check for those brought up on the North American dialect).

We have known for a while that Cheques were under threat, as one by one the big retailers announce that they will no longer accept them using the tired old formula "there ain't no call for that guv, not now". This was Phase 1. The real reason, of course, relates to the statutory protection given to the account holder if a fraudulent cheque is issued that purports to draw funds from his account. In law the person who accepts the cheque holds the liability. Now, the favoured method for payment in shops is plastic. But there is no law, just a "Code of Practice" to which the banks sign up voluntarily, and interpret all by themselves.

The bank rushes the retailer into accepting only cards by promising that the bank will accept the risk of a fraudulent transaction on behalf of the merchant. Only the code of practice then permits the bank to lay off that risk onto the account holder, especially if they can allege that the account holder did not adopt the correct security procedures for his PIN (Personal Identification Number). Until the banks are required by law to accept that liability themselves, there will be no improvement in the very lax security surrounding money transactions in the UK. At present, any security that the account holder has is by grace and favour of the bank's security department. It is all in their absolute gift.

What prompted Yokel to write today was a circular from one of the organisations of which he is a member. That circular noted that subscription payments by cheque were a problem for some members as they only held bank accounts for which a cheque book was not issued/available. Clearly this reflects the success of the Phase 1 campaign. Having convinced the retailers that there is no justification for taking cheques, the bankers now have convinced themselves that there is no justification for making cheques available; Phase 2.

Has cash got much longer to go?

Yokel's fear is this: Revelation 13:17. All for the sake of our "security", you understand.

.

This isn't a problem, its part of the solution; THE FINAL SOLUTION!

Yokel didn't study that particular Shakespear play when at school, so can't quote the entire passage. However, it does relate to a plot in 44BC which resulted in the removal of a certain Julius Caesar. A Roman geezer who had upset the republicans with his ideas of making his temporary dictatorship permanent.

What a date therefore for the final implementation of the EU Data Retention Directive! Such data collection in the UK alone would have got a serious mauling from all and sundry. So in a supreme example of "policy laundering", the UK government "persuaded" the EU that it would be a good idea to insist that every EU region (formerly known as Member States) had laws that require the collection of all electronic traffic data from every citizen. Never one to refuse an offer of increasing its power, the EU jumped at the opportunity and a Directive was passed in record quick time.

Now of course the UK government just pleads "Treaty obligations" every time anyone objects. Mark you, a quick trawl of the internet reveals that few people have objected since the start of 2009. We recognise that it is too late to do anything.

So the fact of every email, website visit, phone call, in fact every electronic communication, will be recorded by your provider just in case Plod wishes to look at it. In the event of mobile phone calls that will include your position at the time, and may include your position all the time. It should only be for a year or two, but Yokel suggests that you keep your eyes open for low key announcements in about 6 months time that it will be extended for 5 years, and a year later for an extension to 10 years.

Of course the EU Directive does not include content. But the UK Government has also had its eye on a content repositary as well. Thus was born its Interception Modernisation Programme; one large government database that would keep the content as well as all the EU Data Retention Directive information. This was due to happen by about now, but Yokel thinks it has been slightly delayed. This may yet cause problems for smaller ISPs. For a number of the smaller ISPs were reportedly doing nothing about implementing the EU Data Retention Directive requirements, having been tipped the wink by the government that they would look after it for them (aren't they kind) when they get their überdatabase. Because this sort of intrusive log keeping is expensive and technically complex. But they haven't got that database yet.

Yokel wonders if the government will lean on BT Wholesale to do the surveillance for them. Apart from the cable operator, every other ISP uses BT connections to some degree, whether for initial connections, fat pipes to the data centres, or anywhere in between. BT Wholesale are in fact perfectly placed to rifle through every electronic traffic in the country. But then of course that was why the government of the day nationalised the post and the telephones in the first place.

Then we can relax, knowing that there is nothing that the State doesn't know. Except of course where it has driven the terrorists to. For it will never find them in the traffic it does capture!

Then we must consider the well developed Firewall UK. Currently used only for kiddieporn, it will not be long before it is extended to other matters. Technically it is well capable of blocking anything and everything. Yokel does not have the stamina to comment on that as well at present, so he will just leave you with a bit more gallows humour. Given the current vogue for the naming of government offices (eg Office of Communications became Ofcom and the Office of the regulator for Gas and Electricity Markets became OfGEM) Yokel wonders if the Office for Firewall UK will become OfFUK? Naw, even a NuLabour Robot (aka MP) could see that one! Couldn't they?

.

This isn't a problem, its part of the solution; the FINAL SOLUTION!

.

Update

Actually, just to spoil a good story, the UK Regulations implementing the Directive will come into effect on 06 April 2009. They should have made it the Wednesday before!

God, this is beyond us. Please will You look after these people?

<UPDATE> This article is back on the TImes site, at the URL shown. Yokel was not watching that site closely, and is unaware of exactly when it was restored. There are quite a few comments on the article, too. With "once bit, twice shy" logic, this copy will remain here, just in case "they" decide to remove it again! </UPDATE>

Yokel doesn't often read The Times as he finds it hard work countering the bias that frequently infects their "reporting". So he missed the original article about freedom by Philip Pullman that was published to coincide with the Convention on Modern Liberty. But there is a bit of flak floating round the blogosphere about the fact that The Times has now removed it. They have even arranged for the Google cache to be scrubbed. The Army Rumour Service is one of many places to republish it. Yokel does so here, duly acknowledging that the article is the copyright of Philip Pullman.

Yokel suspects that this is another part of the try-on by the powers that be, to see if they can provoke the British far enough that they have an excuse to activate the Civil Contingencies Act. For goodness sake, don't give "them" the ammunition they seek.

--- Republished Article ---

THE MALEVOLENT WHISPERS THAT DESPISE OUR FREEDOM

by

Phillip Pullman

"Are such things done on Albion’s shore?

The image of this nation that haunts me most powerfully is that of the sleeping giant Albion in William Blake’s prophetic books. Sleep, profound and inveterate slumber: that is the condition of Britain today.

We do not know what is happening to us. In the world outside, great events take place, great figures move and act, great matters unfold, and this nation of Albion murmurs and stirs while malevolent voices whisper in the darkness - the voices of the new laws that are silently strangling the old freedoms the nation still dreams it enjoys.

We are so fast asleep that we don’t know who we are any more. Are we English? Scottish? Welsh? British? More than one of them? One but not another? Are we a Christian nation - after all we have an Established Church - or are we something post-Christian? Are we a secular state? Are we a multifaith state? Are we anything we can all agree on and feel proud of?

The new laws whisper:

You don’t know who you are

You’re mistaken about yourself

We know better than you do what you consist of, what labels apply to you, which facts about you are important and which are worthless

We do not believe you can be trusted to know these things, so we shall know them for you

And if we take against you, we shall remove from your possession the only proof we shall allow to be recognised

The sleeping nation dreams it has the freedom to speak its mind. It fantasises about making tyrants cringe with the bluff bold vigour of its ancient right to express its opinions in the street. This is what the new laws say about that:

Expressing an opinion is a dangerous activity

Whatever your opinions are, we don’t want to hear them

So if you threaten us or our friends with your opinions we shall treat you like the rabble you are

And we do not want to hear you arguing about it

So hold your tongue and forget about protesting

What we want from you is acquiescence

The nation dreams it is a democratic state where the laws were made by freely elected representatives who were answerable to the people. It used to be such a nation once, it dreams, so it must be that nation still. It is a sweet dream.

You are not to be trusted with laws

So we shall put ourselves out of your reach

We shall put ourselves beyond your amendment or abolition

You do not need to argue about any changes we make, or to debate them, or to send your representatives to vote against them

You do not need to hold us to account

You think you will get what you want from an inquiry?

Who do you think you are?

What sort of fools do you think we are?

The nation’s dreams are troubled, sometimes; dim rumours reach our sleeping ears, rumours that all is not well in the administration of justice; but an ancient spell murmurs through our somnolence, and we remember that the courts are bound to seek the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and we turn over and sleep soundly again.

And the new laws whisper:

We do not want to hear you talking about truth

Truth is a friend of yours, not a friend of ours

We have a better friend called hearsay, who is a witness we can always rely on

We do not want to hear you talking about innocence

Innocent means guilty of things not yet done

We do not want to hear you talking about the right to silence

You need to be told what silence means: it means guilt

We do not want to hear you talking about justice

Justice is whatever we want to do to you

And nothing else

Are we conscious of being watched, as we sleep? Are we aware of an ever-open eye at the corner of every street, of a watching presence in the very keyboards we type our messages on? The new laws don’t mind if we are. They don’t think we care about it.

We want to watch you day and night

We think you are abject enough to feel safe when we watch you

We can see you have lost all sense of what is proper to a free people

We can see you have abandoned modesty

Some of our friends have seen to that

They have arranged for you to find modesty contemptible

In a thousand ways they have led you to think that whoever does not want to be watched must have something shameful to hide

We want you to feel that solitude is frightening and unnatural

We want you to feel that being watched is the natural state of things

One of the pleasant fantasies that consoles us in our sleep is that we are a sovereign nation, and safe within our borders. This is what the new laws say about that:

We know who our friends are

And when our friends want to have words with one of you

We shall make it easy for them to take you away to a country where you will learn that you have more fingernails than you need

It will be no use bleating that you know of no offence you have committed under British law

It is for us to know what your offence is

Angering our friends is an offence

It is inconceivable to me that a waking nation in the full consciousness of its freedom would have allowed its government to pass such laws as:

the Protection from Harassment Act (1997),

the Crime and Disorder Act (1998),

the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (2000),

the Terrorism Act (2000),

the Criminal Justice and Police Act (2001),

the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act (2001),

the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Extension Act (2002),

the Criminal Justice Act (2003),

the Extradition Act (2003),

the Anti-Social Behaviour Act (2003),

the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act (2004),

the Civil Contingencies Act (2004),

the Prevention of Terrorism Act (2005),

the Inquiries Act (2005),

the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (2005),

not to mention a host of pending legislation such as

the Identity Cards Bill,

the Coroners and Justice Bill, and the

Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.

Inconceivable.

And those laws say:

Sleep, you stinking cowards

Sweating as you dream of rights and freedoms

Freedom is too hard for you

We shall decide what freedom is

Sleep, you vermin

Sleep, you scum

A Whitehall enquiry is surely the best way to throw this particular "hot potato" into the long grass (to mix more than enough metaphors). And sure enough we get a Whitehall enquiry. In the meantime, back at HQ, we will continue to expand ourselves.