Jimbo Grumbles

Sippenhaft

2011-08-13T15:30:00.000-07:00

The authority announced on Friday that the first eviction notice had been served – to the mother of an 18-year-old boy accused of violent disorder and attempted theft. (Guardian; Saturday 13 August 2011)

The shameful idea of punishing families for crimes committed by family members has been applied occasionally throughout history. However, the idea is so absurd and so unjust that until recently, it had been codified in law in only one place and in one era: Nazi Germany at the end of WW2, in the form of Sippenhaft ("kin liability"). Now, thanks to Tory maniacs trying to use the riots for political gain, there is a second example.

Anyone with a shred of decency should be deeply ashamed to see this country sliding back to the England described by Charles Dickens, when one could receive capital punishment for stealing a loaf of bread.

"But excessively harsh punishment means that no one will commit crimes anymore." No, it doesn't. It didn't in the 19th century and it won't in the 21st.

I feel truly sorry for everyone whose property has been damaged in the riots of the past days. But if a young man without prior convictions is put in jail for 6 months for stealing a bottle of water from a looted shop, I am beginning to find it morally objectionable to help the police identify rioters.

Sai Baba

2011-04-28T16:59:00.000-07:00

Thousands flock to funeral of India guru Satya Sai Baba (BBC News, 27 April 2011)

Once more it is clear for all to see that BBC News is a bastion of religious apologetics and a haven for irrationalists of all hues. The lengthly article is full of praise for this con artist, charlatan, and quack.

There is one short passage with critical notes: "They say that he was a persuasive fraudster [...]". But this is immediately followed by "These charges were always strenuously denied by the guru and his followers, and were never proved."

For a more informative account of the life of Sai Baba, see:

India would have been a better place without Sathya Sai Baba by Sanal Edamaruku (New Humanist)

moral compass

2011-03-24T20:06:00.000-07:00

Vatican tells U.N. that critics of gays under attack (Reuters, Tue Mar 22, 2011)

Vilifying gays is ok. Vilifying those who vilify gays is not ok. Makes perfect sense, doesn't it?

(Morality according to the Vatican.)

Bill of No Rights

2011-02-18T19:07:00.000-08:00

Statement on sex offenders' register (Home Office, Wed Feb 16 12:14:14 GMT 2011)

The sex offenders' register has existed since 1997. Since that time it has helped the police to protect the public from these most horrific of crimes.

Where is the evidence that the sex offenders' register protects anyone against anything?

Does anyone realise that 'sex offences' include such things as brothel keeping (read 'two prostitutes sharing a flat so that they can protect one another if a client becomes violent')? (Sex workers put in danger by British policing, Melon Farmers, 13th February 2011.) How about people convicted of having sex with inanimate objects? (Bike sex case sparks legal debate, BBC News, Friday, 16 November 2007.) A wide range of other victimless crimes could be listed such as the truly moronic Dangerous Pictures Act. (UK prosecutors drop 'tiger' sex video case, Register, 6th January 2010.) So Theresa May considers these to be the 'most horrific of crimes'? And in the case of sex with bicycles and cartoon tigers, where exactly does protecting the public come into it?

This is Britain all right. Any mention of sex and all fuses blow, and Home Secretaries with puny brains start reciting well rehearsed, but meaningless phrases such as "most horrific" and "protecting the public".

the right of the public to be protected from the risk of re-offending

The risk of re-offending is never zero. The risk of someone not convicted of any crime so far committing a crime, any crime, is never zero either. In the case of certain 'sex crimes', the risk of re-offending is smaller than the risk of someone not convicted of any crime so far committing a crime some time in the future.

The risk of crypto-fascist Home Secretaries in sheep's clothes tomorrow turning into chain-saw murderers is never zero. So we'd better lock her up, shouldn't we?

The final decision of whether an offender should remain on the register will be down to the police

And we know how concerned the police is with our rights, don't we, boys and girls? Letting the British police decide matters involving individual freedom is the best guarantee that citizens' rights will be trampled upon until it is an unrecognisable goo mashed through the cracks in the floor.

Finally, I can tell the House today that the Deputy Prime Minister and Justice Secretary will shortly announce the establishment of a Commission to investigate the creation of a British Bill of Rights.

For those who have been hoping for the creation of a British Bill of Rights to safeguard human rights in the UK, let it be a sobering thought that if this crowd of right-wing loonies gets its way, that Bill of Rights will codify the status quo with the public (a euphemism for the state as an abstract entity) having all the rights and the criminal (meaning any individual who steps out of line) having none.

It is time to assert that it is Parliament that makes our laws, not the courts;

And a populist mob law it will be.

that the rights of the public come before the rights of criminals;

Let's not forget that by definition anyone is a criminal who has been convicted of a crime, and crimes are defined by law makers. Once homosexuality and sodomy were crimes. Women resorting to civil disobedience in the late-19th and early-20th century, in order to demand the right to vote, were breaking the laws of that time. The brave people in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya fighting against tyrany and oppression today are committing acts labelled by various repressive regimes as crimes.

and above all, that we have a legal framework that brings sanity to cases such as these.

If moving against insanity were the objective, our first step should be locking people like Theresa May away for good.

There is the usual blatant government propaganda from the BBC, dressed up as scientific fact:

Who, what, why: When is a sex offender not a risk? (BBC News, 16 February 2011)

"Often these offenders are incredibly furtive," Prof Wilson says.
"They may have committed many, many offences before being caught - their conviction is only the tip of the iceberg."

"furtive"? Does he want to say that the crimes are so hidden that no one notices. Are we, by any chance, talking about victimless crimes again?

Sex offender registration appeals to go ahead (BBC News, 16 February 2011)

"Adults who sexually abuse children should stay on the offenders register for life as we can never be sure their behaviour will change."

If sex offences were distinguished into different categories, such as sex with inanimate objects, indecent exposure, possession of videos with cartoon tiger sex, brothel keeping, and child abuse, then we, the poor readership, would find ourselves intellectually challenged beyond our limited capacities. Therefore the BBC simplifies the discussion by equating sex offence to child abuse. How thoughtful of them. And utterly misleading.

Dinner-table test

2011-01-20T16:40:00.000-08:00

Viewpoints: Anti-Muslim prejudice in Europe (BBC News, 20 January 2011)

Viewpoints? Points (plural)?! The BBC's idea of fair and balanced is to balance a religious apologetic point of view against more of the same. For goodness's sake, don't let anything remotely controversial be said.

To be fair, it seems that also The Telegraph has after reconsideration found the topic too hot to handle. I recall that hundreds of comments were posted yesterday while now none remain. This is confirmed by Richard Dawkins.

Warsi's claim that criticism on an ideology equals prejudice, hatred and bigotry is untenable. In a healthy debate, had any been allowed in the mainstream media today, it would have been possible to challenge such a claim.

wishes

2010-12-25T12:33:00.000-08:00

Happy Celebration-of-a-biological-impossibility, everyone!

Virginity Claims Despoiled... (Melon Farmers, 24th December 2010)

rape

2010-12-07T16:51:00.000-08:00

Background information least likely to be found on BBC News:

When it comes to Assange rape case, the Swedes are making it up as they go along (Crikey, Thursday, 2 December 2010)

The obsession with prosecuting sex crimes has come to a point where, just like in Saudi Arabia and Iran, the victims of rape are put in jail:

I accused my husband of rape. I was locked up – and he was set free (Guardian, Friday 26 November 2010)

Fitwatch

2010-11-16T09:55:00.000-08:00

Met closes down anti-police blog (Guardian, Tuesday 16 November 2010)

[...] the blog was "being used to undertake criminal activities". [...] The Fitwatch blogpost, which last night had reappeared on several other websites, recommended that students "get rid" of clothes they wore at the demonstration and change their appearance.

"If you don't want to get convicted, then don't get caught!" Here, free advice to "undertake criminal activies". Will this blog be closed now, by friendly request from officers of the Met, elected by no one, answerable to no one, following no written law or due process involving judges or magistrates?

And Cameron dares criticise China on matters of free speech:

David Cameron tells China: embrace freedom and the rule of law (Guardian, Wednesday 10 November 2010)

A small reminder of the kind of police thuggery that motivates groups like Fit Watch:

Arrested for asking a policeman for his badge number (Guardian, Sunday 21 June 2009)

Update:

FITWatch: We're Back... (Melon Farmers, 17th November, 2010)

When the law is unjust, civil disobedience becomes a moral imperative.

Children, sex is bad, mmm'kay?

2010-05-01T16:45:00.000-07:00

Children 'over-exposed to sexual imagery' (BBC News, Friday, 26 February 2010)

Author Dr Linda Papadopoulos said there was a clear link between sexualised imagery and violence towards females.

Sorry to be a pain, but, where is the evidence?

"Unless sexualisation is accepted as harmful, we will miss an important opportunity…

Sexualisation is harmful? What exactly is sexualisation and why is it harmful? The dictionary defines "sexualisation" as "To make sexual in character or quality". Then what is the alternative? Let people grow up asexual? Isn't that more harmful, to survival of humanity for example?

Printing photos of topless models in British tabloids is an abject phenomenon that a few more civilised countries somehow can do without. Publishers are given a choice to print those tabloids, and we are given a choice not to buy them, but some Neanderthals among us do anyway. I think this is called freedom, you know, that trifling issue that brave men and women gave their lives for throughout the centuries.

to broaden young people's beliefs about where their values lies," said Dr Papadopoulos, a psychologist.

Ah, "values", dictated by Big Brother. Was this 'expert' recruited by the Labour government by any chance?

Other recommendations include:

* A ban on "sexualised" music videos before the TV watershed

* A ban on Jobcentres advertising positions in lap-dancing clubs and massage parlours

* Internet service providers to block access to pro-bulimia and pro-anorexia websites

* The creation of a website where parents can report any "irresponsible marketing" they believe sexualises young children.

"Ban", "block" and snitching. Yes, this is New Labour all right. If people do something that is inconsistent with your world view, just criminalise them and put them in jail if they persist.

Dr Papadopoulos said there should also be symbols to show when a published photograph had been digitally altered - such as pictures of celebrities manipulated to make them appear thinner.

Have a look at the web site of TV personality Dr Papadopoulos: Dr. Linda. Should I believe her cover photo is not digitally altered? If it is not, then an unlikely amount of make-up was applied. This is a good role model for young women is it?

Dr Papadopoulos said: "The evidence gathered in the review suggests a clear link between consumption of sexualised images, tendency to view women as objects and the acceptance of aggressive attitudes and behaviour as the norm.

So in countries where there are no "sexualised images", there is a much lower incidence of violence against women? Well not exactly. The reason why women in e.g. Saudi Arabia don't report rape is because it is not in their interest:

Rape victim sentenced to 200 lashes and six months in jail (The Guardian, Saturday 17 November 2007)

The review forms part of the Home Office's broader attempts to have a louder public debate about how to combat violence against women and girls.

The last thing this government is interested in is debate. They are interested in pushing through their narrow-minded plans for social engineering. New Labour has learned to its detriment that debate and hiring critical people are bad ideas:

Profile: Professor David Nutt (BBC News, Friday, 30 October 2009)

and

Drug adviser joins exodus after ban on mephedrone (Guardian, Friday 2 April 2010)

So instead of asking for independent scientific advice, Labour now recruits malleable TV personalities to write reports with pre-determined conclusions, dressing up opinion as science.

Home Secretary Alan Johnson said: "We know that parents are concerned about the pressures their children are under at a much younger age, which is why we have already committed to a number of the recommendations in this report.

They already know, do they? How many parents were asked?

As to porn hysteria:

We must speed up to protect children from online porn – expert (Scotsman, 30 March 2010)

"And I'm very proud that Britain is now the only country in the world to have a comprehensive internet safety strategy."

Wrong: Iran, China and North Korea beat us to it.

New Labour protects us from the evil interwebs. Who protects us from New Labour?

Let us on May 6 please wipe this club of warmongers, social engineers, zealots, cheats and charlatans off the face of the earth.

(But don't mind me, I'm just 'bigoted'.)

Collateral Murder

2010-04-05T15:56:00.000-07:00

Collateral Murder (rop.gonggri.jp)

There are no words to describe the shame.

Reason beats quacks (this time)

2010-04-01T16:48:00.000-07:00

Science writer Simon Singh wins libel appeal after 'Orwellian nightmare' (Guardian, Thursday 1 April 2010)

But a grim reminder of the dark forces that are among us:

Libel laws: judging the truth (Guardian, Friday 2 April 2010)

Four Labour MPs joined Conservatives and Lib Dems to block a government change to the libel system.

next decade

2010-01-01T08:52:00.000-08:00

As a belated Christmas present, see:

Cassini Holiday Movies Showcase Dance of Saturn's Moons

Who needs religion when there are true wonders.

See also:

The Atheist's Guide to Christmas
Richard Dawkins' contribution therein read by himself

Those who use and abuse the term "new atheism" ought to listen to this interview with Bertrand Russell in 1959, who sums up all the relevant arguments and counter-arguments in a nutshell. E.g.:

It seems to me a fundamental dishonesty and a fundamental treachery to intellectual integrity to hold a belief because you think it is useful and not because you think it's true.

Irrespective of his sharp mind and exceptional eloquence, Bertrand Russell in fact only repeated existing arguments. For example, the suggestion that there is a causal relationship between belief in a god and morality was already convincingly refuted by Socrates.

So what is "new" about "new atheists"? Perhaps it is that theists feel more threatened than ever, now that they seem to be losing ground to the voices of reason, at least in the Western world. By calling their opponents "new", they demand that atheists justify their position from scratch, as if such justification hasn't been around for at least two and a half millenia. By bickering about the "tone" of the arguments set forth by "militant" or "fundamentalist" atheists, they attempt to distract attention from a lost cause on the intellectual and scientific battleground, trying to take the discourse into the realm of cowardly irrational sentiments and ad hominem attacks.

Belief in, and promotion of something that is patently false isn't morally defensible, and has never been. What may have changed over the last decade is the growing awareness that religion is a serious threat to civilisation. The Aids epidemic in Africa can be largely blamed on Christian and Muslim interference in prevention programmes. G.W. Bush's motivations for the disastrous war in Iraq were his wacky beliefs in Old Testament prophesies, and he found his ally in Tony Blair, whose deranged religious convictions were still in the closet at that time.

As to the 9/11 attacks, there is no rational basis for criticising Islamic fundamentalism without criticising Islam, and similarly, there is no rational basis for criticising Islam without also criticising Judaeo-Christian beliefs and related forms of delusion, including pseudo-science. Suppressing criticism because of the assumption that believers are such vulnerable weaklings that they would be unable to cope with rational arguments could well be regarded as a form of racism. Respect is due to people, but no respect at all is due to a mistaken belief, whether it is astrology, homoeopathy, Scientology or Islam.

At the top of the list of my hopes for humanity in the coming decade is therefore that religion will continue to lose its unwarranted air of respectability, and that some of the most serious forms of quackery will follow suit.

Some more pointers:

'The Evolution of Confusion' by Dan Dennett, AAI 2009

'Morality: From the Heavens or From Nature?' by Dr. Andy Thomson, AAI 2009

Scientology 2009…Year Of Epic Fail

heroic pun

2009-12-01T17:53:00.000-08:00

Shoe attack on Bush shoe thrower (BBC News, Tuesday, 1 December 2009)

Muntadar al-Zaidi is widely considered to be a hero, and in my opinion justly so, for reminding the world of the plight of the Iraqi people caused by the insanity of Bush and Blair. He payed for his symbolic gesture with nine months in jail, not to mention torture. The little shit from BBC News who commented on the footage, Andy Mar, expressed solidarity with his Iraqi colleague using such phrases as "taste of his own medicine" and "you reap what your throw".

With such "defenders of democracy" as the BBC, it is no wonder why Britain today is anything but.

unaccountability

2009-11-07T07:00:00.000-08:00

Call to elect local police chiefs (BBC News, Saturday, 7 November 2009)

Only 0.18% of all complaints against riot squad officers over the last four years were upheld (Guardian, Friday 6 November 2009). This is not a typo! If you're bad at maths, let me explain that 0.18% amounts to about 1 out of 556.

Does that mean that 99.82% of all people who filed complaints were doing so just for the fun of it? I would lean towards believing instead that a culture of unaccountability has pervaded every echelon of law enforcement.

So what do we do about it? Do we organise mass demonstrations to demand punishment of officers who have abused police powers, or to demand punishment of those in government who have entrusted those powers to a fruity club unworthy of them? Do we start an armed revolt against the state perhaps?

No, the cunning plan is to have elected police chiefs. If anything, this will add to the illusion that police have a mandate from the people to fuck up the way they have done in the past. One may also expect an increase in police brutality against "pervs", "social deviants" and other minorities, to please the tabloid-reading, self-righteous masses.

If the voters are stupid, then the easiest way to achieve repression is through a pretence of democracy. This is demonstrated in Britain more than anywhere else (save the US of course).

More repression is on the way:

Her Majesty's Pleasure: How England "Safeguards" Sexuality, by John Ozimek (Carnal Nation, via Melon Farmers 7th November 2009)

comparisons

2009-11-06T16:01:00.000-08:00

Iran protesters hijack 30th anniversary of US embassy seizure (Guardian, Wednesday 4 November 2009)

Iran may aspire to have nuclear weapons. Britain has nuclear weapons.

At the head of Iran's government there are nutcases who might one day start a war against Israel motivated by religious beliefs. Britain got involved in the war in Iraq thanks to Tony Blair's divine revelations. Our next PM doesn't seem to be much of an improvement, to put it mildly.

Misogyny is widespread among Iran's political elite. The same can be said of Britain.

Iran has the Basij militia, who are answerable to no one. In Britain, MI5, MI6, special "anti-terror" forces, and even the regular police appear to be answerable to no one. (See here and here and here and here.)

Many judges in Iran are also clergy, passing sentences while firmly believing in fairy tales from the Arabian peninsula. In Britain, the legal system is dominated by bigotted clown in wigs, and juries who believe anything they read in the Daily Fail.

In Iran there are show trials against the leaders of the opposition. In Britain, people can be held in custody for 28 days without even being charged.

Speaking out against Islam can get one seriously in trouble in Iran. Speaking out against quacks damaging the health of patients can get one seriously in trouble in Britain.

There are reports of torture in Iranian prisons, Britain mostly outsources torture to third-world countries.

The Iranian authorities ban some films for vague reasons. (One such film is Crimson Gold, which I much recommend.) Similarly, cinemas in the UK are receiving "free advice" from police not to show certain films.

The Iranian government reveals its authoritarian nature by implementing software to monitor and filter internet traffic. This corresponds to mandatory data retention and IWF block lists in Britain. And more is to come.

Iran has a democracy in principle, but the government does not reflect the will of the people. The British government is currently supported by perhaps one fifth of the electorate, and will continue to give democracy the finger until the summer of 2010, when another political party will take over that doesn't care a jot about democracy, justice or common decency.

The people of Iran are showing exceptional bravery and dignity, becoming of the Persian culture, with its recorded history going back 5000 years. This may in the end break them free from tyrany. The people of Britain...

Ah, forget it! What's on the telly tonight?

Labour in La La Land

2009-10-30T19:16:00.000-07:00

Chief drug adviser David Nutt sacked over cannabis stance (Guardian, Friday 30 October 2009)

Last time scientists were told to lie in order to support government policy, on penalty of dismissal, was under Ceauşescu.

Science is no longer wanted, nor critical thinking, nor common sense, nor human rights, nor common decency. But who needs all that when we have New Labour ideology.

the new lepers

2009-10-30T17:38:00.000-07:00

One in 10 inmates is sex offender (BBC News, Monday, 26 October 2009)

Most repressive regimes invent a term to refer to people who stand in the way of whatever the regime wants to achieve. The term is given a strong negative connotation, and subsequently the populace tends to treat those branded with the term as less deserving of life and happiness.

Examples of such terms are "infidel", "unbeliever", "sodomite", "social deviant", "subversive", "Untermensch", "asbo", and lately "sex offender", which is another concoction of New Labour's mass criminalisation programme, making clever use of Britons' innate pathological fear of sex. The term includes those who have been convicted of rape or child molestation. But it also includes a policewoman who moonlighted as a prostitute, a man who gave a woman a lift from the train station to a nearby brothel (so called domesting trafficking; yes, people have been sent to jail for that), a father owning a holiday photo of his 17 year old daughter in a bikini, people who read explicit Japanese comic books or watched videos with "extreme pornography", as well as many dozens of innocent people (innocent in every respect except that of British law) whose credit card information was stolen by paedophiles.

Responsible journalists would not use a crude term like "sex offender" for such a wide spectrum of individuals, many of whom don't deserve to be treated as criminals in the first place. But of course, we are not talking about responsible journalism here, we are talking about BBC News.

Police target hip-hop nightclubs

2009-10-18T06:10:00.000-07:00

Police target hip-hop nightclubs (BBC News, Friday, 16 October 2009)

"Detailed research identified which events are most likely to attract crime and disorder," a spokeswoman for the Metropolitan Police told BBC News.

"At the end of the day, you've got to say that certain events attract more trouble than others.

We're shifting the focus away from live music. Originally the definition of what Form 696 applied to was extremely broad so by narrowing it down, it's thought that we can better tailor it to our requirements."

Detailed research identified that Muslims are the most likely ethnicity to blow up subways, so by narrowing down security checks, we can better tailor them to our requirements.

Detailed research identified that men between 30 and 35 are most likely to possess child pornography, so by narrowing down pre-dawn raids to houses of randomly selected men in that age group, we can better tailor them to our requirements.

Detailed research identified that opposition MPs are most likely to leak information embarrassing to the Labour government, so by narrowing down our unlawful arrests, search warrants and intimidation, we can better tailor them to our requirements.

fear of knowledge

2009-10-04T04:35:00.000-07:00

We live in an age of fear, fear of sex, fear of nudity (cf. here and here), fear of the spoken word (cf. the whinging about swear words on radio and TV), and fear of knowledge, exemplified by:

British Museum's Aztec artefacts 'as evil as Nazi lampshades made from human skin' (Mail Online, 27th September 2009)

Solid and scholarly as this exhibition is, I would rather not have the memory of half of these carefully preserved objects in my mind.

The fear of knowledge is perhaps the most pernicious of all, as it promotes ignorance, breeds bigotry, and engenders hatred, Fear of knowledge is what makes history repeat itself, letting people make stupid choices and start pointless wars over and over again.

New Labour is responsible for creating much of that fear, which today borders on hysteria. But let us not forget the contributions made by our 'friends' from the Daily Mail.

extremely cruel

2009-09-29T12:57:00.000-07:00

First prison sentence for extreme porn (Register, 29th September 2009)

"Nothing will be gained by sending you into custody, because you wouldn’t survive because you would be vulnerable. Support and assistance is needed."

Does the judge perchance admit that jail is a nasty place where strong men rape not-so-strong men? If so, this means that the first individual mentioned in the article has been sent to jail for six months for possessing images of a horse being sexually abused, so that he in turn may be abused. But whereas the horse may not even have noticed, he will, every time he reaches down for the soap, for six long months.

I thought the Hammurabi code (ca. 1790 BC) had put an end to such disproportional punishment.

Childcare help 'could be illegal'

2009-09-27T12:22:00.000-07:00

Childcare help 'could be illegal' (BBC News, Sunday, 27 September 2009)

The warning comes after Ofsted told two policewomen to end an arrangement to care for each other's children.

This must be the first country in the world that doesn't even trust policewomen to care for children without abusing them.

According to the newspaper, the Thames Valley officer is believed to have been reported by a neighbour.

Thank you, New Labour, for having turned this country into a hysterical hell hole, dominated by fear, distrust and snitching. It may take a generation or more to undo the damage you maniacs have done to this society.

Teacher jailed for sex with pupil

2009-09-27T06:09:00.000-07:00

Teacher jailed for sex with pupil (BBC News, Monday, 21 September 2009)

It is highly unethical for a teacher to continue teaching someone or to be in any way involved in their grading, after they have started a relationship. The teacher ought to have been disciplined for this, and possibly dismissed.

There is no mention however of paedophilia in the clinical sense being a factor here, nor that the relationship was very different from a normal romance between two young people, one somewhat younger than the other. The state then has no business interfering in one of the few things that make life worth living, and the long jail sentence cannot reasonably be seen as anything other than a perverse application of a crude law.

An impact statement from the girl's parents said the teacher went "out of her way" to befriend them and their "vulnerable" daughter.

Note that "impact statement" includes considerations about the parents. Often in such cases, parents choose to see themselves as victims. Their hurt pride means more to them than the best interests of their children.

"It is, of course, against the law to engage in sexual activity with a person under 16, even with her consent."

As a rule, statements of judges are full of self-righteous moralising bullshit, suggesting they have the private phone number of God™, whom they consult to distinguish right and wrong. In this case however, there is no mention of "wrong", but just of "against the law". This country has sunk so low that we don't even pretend any more that the law is a reflection of any kind of natural justice.

If the law is out of synch with reality, then reality will have to adapt to the law. This harsh sentencing will miraculously alter the genes of Britons, and from now on, no one will fall in love with anyone on the opposite side of the 16th birthday.

The judge added: "The relationship involved a fair degree of deception not only in respect of the school but also to the girl's parents."

How strange that lovers would try to keep such a relationship secret, when bringing it in the open would only get one of the two in jail for a long time.

The school was made aware of the affair through an anonymous e-mail tip-off, the court heard.

Nice to have such friends and colleagues. I wonder how they can bear the guilt for the rest of their lives.

The judge, who was told the girl and the teacher were genuinely in love, did not uphold the prosecution's request for a sexual offences prevention order as it would be "draconian and unnecessarily cruel" to the girl as well.

How kind of the judge to consider the girl's interests. No doubt she will be delighted that she can see her lover in jail for the next 15 months.

The original BBC News article also included the following (which has since been edited out, but it is still found in the Guardian article, which seems to have been derived from it):

Officers raided the teacher's maisonette in Greenwich, south-east London, and arrested the 26-year-old. They seized sex toys from the house.

What do these "sex toys" prove, other than that BBC News journalists are pathetic little weasels who are all too eager to harm people's privacy far beyond the call of duty?

See also:

Blurred boundaries for teachers (Guardian, Wednesday 23 September 2009)

Some of the comments are noteworthy. Whereas Guardian readers tend to be open-minded and critical of the nanny state, as soon as sex is involved even they turn into hysterical bigotted monsters, calling for even harsher penalties for "pervs".

What is it with Britons and sex?

Policewoman who worked as a prostitute is jailed

2009-09-13T04:06:00.000-07:00

Policewoman who worked as a prostitute is jailed (Guardian, Thursday 10 September 2009)

Policemen who shot an innocent commuter in the head (seven times, with hollow-point bullets) never spent one minute in jail. The policeman who found pleasure in clubbing an innocent passerby to death at the G20 will most likely never receive a jail sentence either. But making love (with remuneration) apparently shakes the very foundations of this society and so warrants the harshest punishments.

The convicted woman might have served society well as a police officer who, for a change, was not clubbing innocent people to death or shooting them in the head (seven times, with hollow-point bullets), regardless of whether she was moonlighting as a private math tutor or as anything else. Instead, her life has been devastated and she has been turned into a burden on society, at least for the next 15 months, when we will all be paying room and board for her.

Update (2009-10-21)

I'm still puzzled why the establishment came down so hard on this woman. Was it perhaps because her very existence was an embarrassment to Jacqui Smith's claim that all prostitutes are helpless women who are forced into it by ruthless pimps?

For more ideology-driven 'fact' finding, and New Labour creating statistics to suit its purpose, in concert with a police force that is out of control, see:

Inquiry fails to find single trafficker who forced anybody into prostitution (Guardian, Tuesday 20 October 2009)

PM apology after Turing petition

2009-09-12T10:44:00.000-07:00

PM apology after Turing petition (BBC News, Friday, 11 September 2009)

The intelligentsia in Turing's time were deploring eras when women didn't have the right to vote and were otherwise oppressed. But in the 1950s it was not fashionable to defend the rights of gays. Alan Turing was a genius and his contributions to code-breaking were vital to the war effort. But after the war he was simply a perv, and standing up for that sort of people was not salonfähig.

Today, complacent intellectuals condemn persecution of gays (or to be exact, persecution of one famous gay man) in the 1950s. How courageous to criticise law makers most of whom have been dead for decades! Will the same intellectuals stand up for the rights of consenting adults in the BDSM community who are persecuted by today's government for enjoying non-vanilla sexual activities and images thereof? Defending pervs? No way!

Tackling the film piracy problem

2009-08-03T04:00:00.000-07:00

Tackling the film piracy problem (BBC News, Tuesday, 28 July 2009)

"They'll clamp the camera to a seat or use a tripod obscured by a coat. They'll often use microphones, placing them three of them four seats either side to get a stereo effect."

The movie industry is trying to shove the cursed Blu-ray format down our throats, with the justification that the public is demanding higher quality video and audio. That same industry also claims that 90% of "pirated" films are obtained by crummy recording devices hidden in coats of cinema-goers.

As always, BBC News is willing to help industry spread such propaganda, unhindered by any form of critical thinking. The objective is political correctness, not accuracy.

Two more recent cases of BBC News twisting the facts, presumably with ideological intentions:

Windfarm Britain means (very) expensive electricity (Register, 22nd July 2009)

BBC erroneously reports first charges under Extreme Porn Act (Melonfarmers, 25th July 2009)

Labour 'men-only leadership' over

2009-08-03T03:47:00.000-07:00

Labour 'men-only leadership' over (BBC news, Sunday, 2 August 2009)

men "cannot be left to run things on their own"

The only meaningful interpretation of this claim is as yet another deserved stab in the back of Gordon Brown. (Why is he still here?) But honestly, I don't think Brown's disastrous leadership is specifically anti-women, just anti-human. With the gross incompetence of Jacqui Smith and Hazel Blears still fresh in our minds, this is not the best time to argue more women are wanted in the Labour party.

Facebook criticised by Archbishop

2009-08-03T03:36:00.000-07:00

Facebook criticised by Archbishop (BBC News, Sunday, 2 August 2009)

There are many bad things one can say about Facebook. The many bugs and browser-specific features reveal it was built by incompetent dimwits. The privacy policies, or their absence, one should be extremely wary of as well.

Nevertheless, after taking precautions, I signed up and I now find Facebook useful to keep informed about social events, where I meet people face-to-face. I concede however that other people may interact with their friend online in place of face-to-face meetings.

So does Facebook on the average lead to more face-to-face meetings, or to fewer? Well, there is this revolutionary new idea to find out things about the world. It is called scientific inquiry. One study on Facebook is for example:

Are Facebook Friends Like Face-to-Face Friends: Investigating Relations Between the Use of Social Networking Websites and Social Capital (Annual meeting of the International Communication Association, 2008)

One major disadvantage of science is that it requires effort. It is much easier to become the leader of some fruity club that worships pink unicorns, celestial teapots or whatever other garbled hogwash. And then you can say whatever you want, without obligation to offer any empirical support whatsoever. Your words will be jotted down by open-mouthed BBC News churnalists desperate to reach their quotas, and published on the front page of their website.

aspiring member of the EU

2009-07-10T13:51:00.000-07:00

Turkey attacks China 'genocide' (BBC News, Friday, 10 July 2009)

Turkey's prime minister has described ethnic violence in China's Xinjiang region as "a kind of genocide".

And the 'great catastrophe' of 1915, when up to 1.5 million Armenians lost their lives 'accidentally' (oops!), was not genocide? (Turkish PM dismisses apology for alleged Armenian genocide; Guardian, Thursday 18 December 2008) Oh, of course, those Armenians were not muslims, so that doesn't count, does it?

secret agents

2009-07-09T05:56:00.000-07:00

BBC 'news':

Rare 007 car to go under the hammer (BBC News, Wednesday, 8 July 2009)

Real news:

The truth about torture (Guardian, Wednesday 8 July 2009)

I'm so confused! Isn't being a secret agent all about driving fast cars, seducing beautiful women with foreign accents, and sipping martinis (shaken not stirred)? Or is it about ~~ripping out fingernails~~ having Pakistani officers rip out fingernails and ~~cutting up penises~~ having Moroccan officers cut up penises?

New Labour has long since managed to pervert each and every section of the state, even more than the Tories ever did. For the secret services, they being secret and all that, it has merely taken a little longer for the veil to be lifted. Is the populace in shock now? Certainly. At the death of Wacko Jacko. Once we're over that, we'll be looking forward to the next James Bond film, and we'll feel as proud to be British as always.

Can children be criminals?

2009-06-23T19:20:00.000-07:00

Can children be criminals? (BBC News, Monday, 15 June 2009)

"We have to tell children 'you have done wrong', and if that means going through the court system that's what we have to do."

The flaw in the reasoning is that in this country being convicted and being wrong couldn't be further apart, and the idea of British law as a moral compass has been thoroughly discredited. Only a few bigoted special-interest groups, such as Mothers Against Murder and Aggression (MAMAA), still believe in this myth. If punishment makes good behaviour, we must be the best-behaved nation in the world.

Especially under New Labour, laws have been introduced with the sole purpose of being able to put more people in jail for longer, for 'crimes' that cause little or no harm to anyone. A person a few days past their 16th birthday can be jailed for having consensual relations with a person a few days before their 16th birthday. Someone can be jailed for possessing "extreme porn" involving consenting adults. A computer user can be jailed for forgetting the password to encrypted files. A scientist can be convicted of libel if he justly, and in the best interests of the public, criticises the quackery of chiroquacks.

Conversely, the police can end the lives of innocent people without being prosecuted. Police can harass people and hold them in custody for several days even if very clearly no offense has been committed. They can do this without risk of receiving a reprimand from their superiors, and in fact it seems harassment and arrest have now become standard tools for dealing with any kind of dissent, encouraged by the highest echelons of the state. (See for example: Video shows surveillance protesters bundled to ground by police; Guardian, Sunday 21 June 2009.) Big companies such as BT can snoop on internet users without bearing the consequences. One PM and one former PM who are both guilty of deceiving the public and leading the country into a disastrous war will likely never be prosecuted.

If one gives a 12 year old boy a criminal record for calling a girl a 'paki' one doesn't teach him that it is wrong to call a girl a 'paki'. Instead one teaches him that the state is ruthless in how it treats transgressions of mostly arbitrary norms. One should not be surprised if such a boy then grows up to be a banker or MP, robbing people's money in ways that happen to be legal, but abject nonetheless.

Energy saving madness

2009-06-23T19:16:00.000-07:00

Sainsbury's brings green power to the checkout with 'kinetic plates' (Guardian, Monday 15 June 2009)

The system, pioneered for Sainsbury's by Peter Hughes of Highway Energy Systems, does not affect the car or fuel efficiency,

In other words, it creates energy out of nowhere. Right.

"Hey you guys, let's drive our Hummer 30 miles to Sainsbury's and pass over the kinetic road plates! To save energy!"

Jacqui's legacy

2009-06-04T17:38:00.000-07:00

Jacqui Smith's marriage 'strong' (BBC News, Sunday, 5 April 2009)

I think I should be very open about my expenses, but there are bits of my private life that I don't think should be open to public scrutiny.

If what happens between consenting adults is exposed to public scrutiny, then that's quite awkward. Isn't it, Mrs. Smith? This is quite unlike your Extreme Porn Law (see Backlash), which doesn't interfere at all with what happens between consenting adults. Does it, Mrs. Smith?

As you sow...

Update

Recommended reading:

Comment: Good riddance to a bad home secretary (politic.co.uk, Tuesday, 02, Jun 2009)

It fails to mention a few fuckups, but then again, there were so many. See also:

Rule nothing out with these Home Office farceurs – except competence (Guardian, Friday 8 May 2009)

For now, let's not rely on the next home secretary being less of a wackjob.

Gordon's unshakable truths

2009-06-04T17:19:00.000-07:00

800 Britons on waiting list for Swiss suicide clinic (Guardian, Sunday 31 May 2009)

To value life is as much part of our nature as to have compassion with suffering fellow human beings. As we're all going to die, and many of us as the result of a painful illness, no one can escape the conflict between the will to live and the will to end suffering. No set of laws could offer a perfect legal framework to resolve that conflict for individual people in individual circumstances, but anyone who thinks they are entitled to an absolute judgement on this issue are either stark raving mad, the Pope, or Gordon Brown.

Brown against assisted dying law (BBC News, Tuesday, 30 December 2008)

He replied: "Well I'm totally against laws on that.

Physicians who spend their entire careers dealing with life and death, and the illnesses and suffering that separate them, would never use the word "totally" when they have to decide whether to administer pain relief to a patient at the expense of bringing them closer to the end of their lives. Terminally ill patients who consider active suicide have to make an even more difficult choice. But Gordon Brown is "totally against", so that settles it.

To a man who possesses absolute truths, I wouldn't entrust my bicycle, let alone the job of running the country.

it's not really for us to create any legislation that would put pressure on people to feel that they had to offer themselves because they were causing trouble to a relative or anything else.

So it is all about people getting rid of burdensome parents, siblings or children, is it? And what the hell is "anything else" meant to imply? Do you suggest that children want to treat their parents to euthanasia so they can get their hands on the inheritance? Or what? Come on, tell us what is in your sick mind!

Dear Gordon, step down now. There is not a soul in Britain who takes you seriously anymore, if anyone ever did. And take the rest of those loony-tunes with you!

Update

People who want Gordon Brown to stay do this for all the wrong reasons, e.g. fear of losing their own jobs.

Call to back PM as unrest grows (BBC News, Sunday, 7 June 2009)

We're now less than a year away from the election. We have no more chances left. We either pull ourselves together, stake out what we stand for, or we will be gone.

Where does the well-being of the country come in? Or restoring the people's trust in democracy? We have entered the cynical phase of clinging to power for the sake of clinging to power.

file sharing

2009-05-29T16:27:00.000-07:00

Cost to British economy of free downloads is revealed (Guardian Friday 29 May 2009)

In my blog on music, I frequently mention budget CDs with the most amazing music, much of which has never appealed to wide audiences and will never appeal to wide audiences. How come such commercially unattractive releases exist? Who is making money selling 17-CD sets with new recordings of organ works by Olivier Messiaen, going for less than 2 pounds per CD? It is a mystery to me.

Two things are clear. First, file sharing has never been so widespread. Second, never before have so many interesting recordings been available for so little money, including historical recordings, recordings of contemporary music, and new recordings of older music. If there is the slightest causal relation between the two, then please let everyone keep doing whatever they are doing, because the impact on art seems to be positive.

As to less money flowing into the pockets of imbeciles shouting their unschooled lungs out and recording mind-numbing noise in dad's garage, screw them!

life is a fatal disease

2009-05-29T10:44:00.000-07:00

Sheriff calls for blind cord ban (BBC News, Friday, 29 May 2009)

the dangers associated with looped blind cords [...] are linked with the death of at least one child a year in the UK

The incidence of people being shot or assaulted by police, resulting in serious injury or death, is comparable at the very least, and possibly far higher. A few particularly appalling cases spring to mind: Stephen Waldorf (1983), James Ashley (1997), Chris Sherwood (1998), Harry Stanley (1999), Derek Bennett (2001), Jean Charles de Menezes (2005), Mohammed Abdul Kahar (2006), Ian Tomlinson (2009). This is not to mention the around 100 people who die in police custody every year.

So let's ban the police!

Family see Jesus image in Marmite

2009-05-28T14:10:00.000-07:00

Family see Jesus image in Marmite (BBC News, Thursday, 28 May 2009)

Just when I thought BBC News churnalism couldn't get any sillier, this comes along.

weapon of mass destruction

2009-05-27T17:45:00.000-07:00

Man shot dead by police in siege (BBC News, Tuesday, 12 May 2009)

In an heroic action, police thwarted an attack that could have ended civilisation as we know it by killing millions (eventually).

Two uniformed officers responding to 999 calls went to Cheapside, Shildon, where they saw a man with what they thought was a crossbow.

Clearly a dangerous terrorist.

Supt Graham Hall, from Durham Police, said the officers involved in the shooting were receiving support.

It was further reported that one of the officers sustained serious blood stains on his left sleeve while verifying that the terrorist had been successfully eliminated. It took two washings with different detergents to remove the stains. The laundry bill has been sent to the family of the deceased.

This incident happened some time ago, and there have been no new reports. But under the surface, anger among the public is gathering momentum, about the police yet again taking their monopoly on violence as a licence to kill, and there will be mass demonstrations. Soon. Perhaps. Maybe not. Ah, forget it!

national victory

2009-05-27T17:39:00.000-07:00

Susan Boyle mentioned in Simpsons (BBC News, Wednesday, 20 May 2009)

How blessed are we, for our cultural achievements are acknowledged even in the US. So the Americans remembered their aircraft carrier off the coast of Europe.

The function of crappy TV shows is to detract attention from true horrors. Did you think Susan Boyle looked out of place on the stage of a television show? If you seek a truly toe-curling experience, watch the interview with Hazel Blears (Guardian, Tuesday 5 May), pretending to have a clue and to be qualified to be cabinet minister.

But stupid me, we shouldn't criticise our overlords, as this might drive them to suicide or erode confidence in democracy. So let's collectively stick our heads in the sand and when we look up, Britain will have magically transformed into a modern democracy with responsible leaders.

Siberian child 'raised by dogs'

2009-05-27T17:37:00.000-07:00

Siberian child 'raised by dogs' (BBC News, Wednesday, 27 May 2009)

Romulus and Remus in Siberia? Or the gullibility of BBC churnalists knows no bounds? I know which is my preferred conjecture.

a question of statistics

2009-04-12T15:28:00.000-07:00

Ian Tomlinson: three-year wait for G20 death verdict (The Observer, Sunday 12 April 2009)

Proposed exercise for statistics class:

If we suppose that police have to violently assault 500 unworthy civilians, of different ages and in different states of health, before one yokel finally has the decency to roll over and die, then what is the expected number of such assaults that we never hear about, either because no cameras were present, or because the inflicted harm was not fatal? There are some unknowns left in the equation, but you get the idea.

In what seems a concerted effort by government, police and judiciary, demonstrations are being pushed to the margins of the political arena. Techniques such as kettling, excessive violence by police, and their routinely taking pictures and personal details of people entering and leaving demonstrations, these are discouraging all but the most determined citizens to take part in future political events. Among the group that remains, there will be a relatively high percentage of trouble makers, whose vandalism will undoubtedly be used as an argument to crack down on demonstrations even more.

Kudos to the Labour government for finding a smart way to prevent major demonstrations without formally banning them, which would surely have led to a rebuke from the European Court of Human Rights (not that this government would care). Unless one suffers from the delusion that democracy equates to putting a pencil mark on a ballot paper every few years, the recent developments are added cause for concern, next to all the other recent assaults on civil liberties.

A good illustration of such warped views towards democracy is offered in a toe-curling CiF article by Jack Straw (Our record isn't perfect. But talk of a police state is daft; The Guardian, Friday 27 February 2009), which abounds in hollow rhetoric and escapism. Among its tenets are that we shouldn't complain because the situation in Britain is not yet as bad as it is in some dictatorships in the Middle East or South Asia, and if we don't like the present government, we should just keep our traps shut until we finally get a chance to not re-elect them, which might not be until June 2010. That is supposed to make us feel better?!

Update:

Police 'kettle' tactic feels the heat (BBC News, Thursday, 16 April 2009)

Despite the two instances of alleged police assault, [...]

Excuse me?! Two? Again we see why BBC News has very little to do with serious journalism. There are two incidents that reached the front pages because either someone died or cameras managed to catch a police officer in flagrante. Far more incidents of gratuitous police violence were reported, and it is likely many more took place. See:

G20 police officers may face multiple claims over brutality allegations (The Guardian, Saturday 11 April 2009)

The Independent Police Complaints Commission said it had received 120 complaints relating to police actions at the demonstrations.

Scots criminal age to go up to 12

2009-03-14T09:09:00.000-07:00

Scots criminal age to go up to 12 (BBC News, Sunday, 1 March 2009)

The age of criminal responsibility in Scotland is to be raised from eight to 12, ministers have confirmed.

It will bring Scotland into line with most of Europe,

Say again? Toddlers of eight years old can currently be prosecuted in Scotland?! In any case, "into line with most of Europe" is hardly accurate.

In Belgium the age of criminal responsibility is 18. The streets of Brussels and Antwerp must by now be empty, because all inhabitants have been mugged and stabbed by gangs of juvenile delinquents who are untouchable by the law. Funny, last time I was in Belgium I got a different impression and felt quite safe. At least the Belgian police doesn't go about shooting innocent people in the head (seven times, with hollow-point bullets).

Call for ban on military protests

2009-03-14T08:55:00.000-07:00

Call for ban on military protests (BBC News, Saturday, 14 March 2009)

Well, well. The self-proclaimed champion of civil liberties wants to curtail civil liberties. Who would have thought. The sooner Labour is defeated in humiliating and utterly devastating elections the better, but head for the hills by the time the Tories take over. The right to protest is a cornerstone of democracy. And if not against the state, especially sections of the state that have a monopoly on violence, then what's the point of protesting?

"What I'm suggesting is that British soldiers, who I think are our finest young men and women, the cream of society, should also be protected from that sort of gratuitous abuse they experienced last week," he said.

David Davies also seems to think of himself as the cream of society. So the next bill he is going to table calls for a ban on protests against self-important, hypocritical, opportunistic, death-penalty supporting, twopenny swindlers.

"If they were anti-war protesters, they should have come down to Parliament and protested in a peaceful way," he said.

You may protest, but only on our terms. I think that is called 'state-organised protest', perfected to an art form by such countries as Syria and Iran.

He also called for charges brought against individuals in Luton who allegedly hurled abuse at the protesters to be dropped.

You cannot abuse anyone, except people we don't like.

See also:

Tories' pledge (The Guardian, Monday 2 March 2009)

The Conservatives' pledge comes as the party also continues to demand repeal of the Human Rights Act. In a message of support to the convention the Tory leader, David Cameron, condemned the act for providing a "veneer of respectability" to the erosion of civil liberties under Labour.

Versus:

Tories to review Human Rights Act (BBC News, Monday, 23 August, 2004)

The 1998 Act has given rise to "too many spurious rights" [...]

So in 2004 they wanted to scrap the Human Rights Act because it gave citizens too many rights. In 2009 they want to scrap the Human Rights Act because it gives citizens too few rights. Whatever way the wind blows.

Inherit the wind

2009-02-14T07:13:00.000-08:00

Last Thursday was the 200th birthday of Charles Darwin, who contributed the single most powerful theory that shaped our understanding of who we are and where we come from. This November, it will be 150 years ago when On the Origin of Species was published. Those who still harbour religious beliefs are incorrigeable fools, and that's official now.

Before anyone objects that evolution must not be equated to atheism, it should be pointed out that the suggestion that evolution implies atheism originally stems from religious circles. If for no other reason than the spectacular acting, highly recommended is: Inherit the wind, the 1960 film related to the Scopes Monkey Trial, with Spencer Tracy and Fredric March.

Modern Liberty

2009-02-14T05:45:00.000-08:00

Let the convention on Modern Liberty at 28th Feb 2009 be a turning point after a decade of unbridled erosion of civil liberties by New Labour. Some of the keynote speakers are strange bedfellows, such as David Davis, whose motives in the context of the rejected 42-day detention legislation seemed to be about electoral opportunism more than anything else, and Shami Chakrabarti, who has done so much for freedom of religion at the expense of freedom of expression and freedom from religion. Let us hope that ideological differences between the various participants of the conference will be set aside in favour of effective opposition to the government's totalitarian aspirations, and its ever growing disregard for democracy, justice, common sense, scientific evidence, in short a disregard for any but their own petty-minded, deluded thoughts.

Microsoft doublespeak

2009-02-14T05:30:00.000-08:00

Microsoft bounty for worm creator (BBC News, Friday, 13 February 2009)

The software giant is offering the cash reward because it views the Conficker worm as a criminal attack.

A similar fallacious reasoning underlies the claim "Guns don't kill people, people do", as often used by the NRA.

"People who write this malware have to be held accountable," said George Stathakopulos, of Microsoft's Trustworthy Computing Group.

Who holds Microsoft accountable for their crappy software? If some dunce decides to use Vista in his company and productivity suffers because of one of Microsoft's bugs, can he claim damages? (Needless to say: of course not!)

He told BBC News the company was "not prepared to sit back and let this kind of activity go unchecked".

Then make sure there are no more blatant security leaks in your software, you morons!

"Our message is very clear - whoever wrote this caused significant pain to our customers and we are sending a message that we will do everything we can to help with your arrest," said Mr Stathakopulos.

Microsoft causes significant pain to its customers.

The Conficker worm is a self-replicating program that takes advantage of networks or computers that have not kept up to date with Windows security patches.

The Conficker worm is a self-replicating program that takes advantage of Windows.

In 2003 Microsoft created its reward programme with $5m (£3.4m) in funding to help law enforcement agencies bring computer virus and worm authors to justice.

Is there any money left for quality assurance? Does Microsoft do quality assurance?

"We have not seen this type of worm or one of its class since 2004," said Mr Stathakopulos.

Computer worms were unknown to science before 2004, and had never attacked a Microsoft OS before, so they couldn't have foreseen any of this and couldn't have taken precautions earlier. Right. Pull the other one.

Bunch of incompetent wankers!

Dutch protest Britain's ban of right-wing lawmaker

2009-02-10T19:39:00.000-08:00

Dutch protest Britain's ban of right-wing lawmaker (Yahoo News, Tue Feb 10, 2009)

Wilders said the embassy letter informed him he was being refused entry because his views "threaten community harmony and therefore public security" in Britain. [Full letter here.]

'Community harmony'? What 'Community harmony'? The community harmony of putting innocent Muslims in jail or shooting them in the shoulder? The community harmony of shooting alleged Muslims in the head (seven times, with hollow-point bullets)? The community harmony that improved so much after we started the illegal war in Iraq, which has been interpreted by almost the entire Muslim world as directed against them?

We shan't blame the Dutch if in retaliation they declare David Miliband and his fellow buffoons persona non grata. In fact, we should do that. I'm sure there is some banana republic somewhere where they'd fit in nicely.

By the way, Geert Wilders' crime seems to be that of suggesting there is a link between Islam and Islamic terrorism. See also:

HENTOFF: The cost of criticizing jihadists (The Washington Times, Monday, February 9, 2009)

Further:

Banned from Britain, Dutch campaigner against Islam (Independent, Wednesday, 11 February 2009)

Last night, the Home Office refused to comment on Mr Wilders' case. But a spokesman said: "The Government opposes extremism in all forms. It will stop those who want to spread extremism, hatred and violent messages in our communities from coming to our country.

English 'bishop' Richard Williamson is certainly extreme in his denial of the Holocaust. Will his entry into the UK henceforth be denied? Some called the atheist bendy-bus campaign extreme. Will foreigners who donated to it be kicked out now? I happen to extremely dislike the Labour government and find freedom of expression extremely important. Will I be sent to jail for this?

Update:

Apropos "community harmony", basically the same rhetoric has been used to justify the arrest of an editor in India who published an article by Johann Hari:

Johann Hari: Despite these riots, I stand by what I wrote (Independent, Friday, 13 February 2009)

They said I had upset "the harmony" of India, and it could only be restored by my arrest. But this is a lop-sided vision of "harmony". It would mean that religious fundamentalists are free to say whatever they want – and the rest of us have to shut up and agree.

Well put. More by Johann Hari in:

One Law For All - No Sharia (YouTube)

Clarkson apologises for PM remark

2009-02-08T08:52:00.000-08:00

Clarkson apologises for PM remark (BBC News, Saturday, 7 February 2009)

Of the 625 words this article devotes to utterances by two-eyed English idiot Jeremy Clarkson, only 22 are related to his claim that our PM is lying. Apparently, there is so much consensus on this matter that further discussion is futile. In an alleged democracy, it is a very sad state of affairs indeed if one can take for granted that statements coming from the highest political office are less than truthful.

As in the case of the Golliwog affair, while we are arguing about semantics and double entendre, we are not talking about the issues. We are not talking about the economy and whether we can trust our glorious leader to steer us through difficult times. Neither are we talking about dormant and not so dormant racist and xenophobic tendencies in our society that go well beyond choice of words.

islanders

2009-02-02T15:20:00.000-08:00

Nuclear workers join strikes wave (BBC News, Monday, 2 February 2009)

"So an Italian took your job. Why don't you try to find a job in Italy then?"

"Er, you mean, you mean, I would have to learn a foreign language?!"

See also:

UK foreign language teaching hits all-time low (Register, 12th June 2007)

Support Scots language in our schools, ministers told (Scotsman, 28 January 2009)

Welsh language legal bid starts (BBC News, Monday, 2 February 2009)

BBC pumps 60 quid a head into Gaelic (Register, 2nd February 2009)

Should we fear that the French, Germans and Spanish will start protesting against the 290,000 UK citizens currently working on the continent? I wouldn't lose sleep over it.

Further:

Foreign labour strikes spread to Sellafield (Guardian, Tuesday 3 February 2009)

Unite official Kenny Ward told the crowd: "Over the last week your heroic actions here have inspired thousands in our county, hundreds of thousands in our country and millions across the globe.

"Hundreds of thousand in our country"? Not unlikely. About that many voted BNP at recent elections. "Millions across the globe"? Well, perhaps there is like-mindedness among authorities in Lucca and Milan:

Italy bans kebabs and foreign food from cities (Times, January 31, 2009)

deniable encryption

2009-01-31T21:04:00.000-08:00

In a faraway land inhabited by elves, an evil emperor who hated butterflies decided to make it illegal for anyone to possess images of butterflies. It didn't make any difference whether the depicted butterflies were real or imaginary. Members of the anti-butterfly squad would track down butterfly lovers, and seize and investigate their computers hoping to find offending material. This post describes how elves in that faraway land armed themselves against this, so that they might continue to indulge in their predilection for butterflies, without bothering anyone nor being bothered by the evil emperor's thugs.

Traditionally, electronic data is protected from prying eyes by encryption. Encryption turns useful data (plaintext) into a form that is useless and looks like gobbledygook (ciphertext). The gobbledygook can only be turned back into the original data with the same key that was used to encrypt the data in the first place (symmetric encryption).

In the old days, butterfly lovers used to encrypt their images to keep them secret. However, the evil emperor's thugs then started to throw people in dungeons for the mere offence of not revealing their keys. The elves therefore turned to an ingenious invention called deniable encryption, which allowed them to argue plausibly that there was no key, or more precisely with regard to what will follow, to argue that there was only one key, when in reality there were two. The first key encrypted and decrypted allowed images of, say, ladybugs and the second key was used for forbidden images of butterflies. Of course the elves would deny the existence of that second key when asked.

Now let's see how this works in more detail. The technique is most effective where it is applied on an entire device, let's say an external harddrive of 500 GB. A tool is used to turn the complete storage space into gobbledygook. (Warning: all existing information on it is thereby irretrievably erased!) Then either one or two keys are fixed. With the first key one can store encrypted images of ladybugs at the beginning of the harddrive, say in the first 1 GB. Optionally, with a second key one can store encrypted images of butterflies in the remaining 499 GB. The entire contents of the harddrive now looks like gobbledygook if one doesn't know either key, and if one knows one of the keys one can only access the corresponding part of the storage space, and one cannot tell whether the other key exists at all.

Whenever the anti-butterfly squad would stop by, an elf would first claim that his harddrive was broken: "Look, the damn thing doesn't even mount!" He would usually be believed by the underpayed, understaffed, undermotivated and virtually illiterate goons, but when they were in a particularly tenacious mood and kept putting pressure on him, the elf felt he didn't have any other choice but to reveal the first key (and only the first key) to them, and that was the end of it: "Okay, so far I've only stored 1 GB of images yet on my 500 GB harddrive, so what? And I encrypted the ladybug images because I was embarrassed about liking ladybugs, and didn't want my friends to find out. Butterflies?! I don't know nothing of no butterflies!"

The most popular tool realising deniable encryption is TrueCrypt, which is an industrial-strength application available for Windows, Mac and Linux. Each of the two keys allows access to a volume, which behaves just like any other filesystem, consisting of directories and files. The two volumes are, for obvious reasons, called the outer volume and the hidden volume, respectively. Depending on the operating system, one should follow the relevant instructions on the TrueCrypt website, to install the tool and to turn an arbitrary harddrive (which can also be a thumbdrive) into an encrypted device.

Important is that the outer volume should only be modified in a protected mode, which requires both passwords to be entered. The reason is that otherwise the hidden volume might become damaged by being overwritten. For normal usage this is not a problem, as the contents of the outer volume merely serves as decoy, and will normally be fixed once and for all, while one may regularly want to add material to the hidden volume. Conversely, there is no risk of the hidden volume overwriting the outer volume, because the hidden volume 'knows' how much storage space is available to it, which is fixed when the volumes are created, while the outer volume for obvious reasons 'knows' nothing of the inner volume.

Further remarks:

Elves knew that suitable keys had to be long and not consist of words from any dictionary, because such keys would be too easy for the anti-butterfly squad to guess.
The butterfly images were best directly copied from the source (e.g. a fellow elf's harddrive) onto the encrypted volume. This is because any material temporarily stored on an unencrypted harddrive might leave residual traces. Similarly, viewing of the images was best done without copying them to unencrypted memory.
With all of the above precautions, the anti-butterfly squad might still find evidence in the logs of a computer that an elf had played a file called extreme-butterfly5.avi. This might cause some embarrassment, even if the filename didn't constitute proof that the video had in fact been about butterflies. (In mentioned evil empire, the mere accusation of a butterfly-related crime was enough to wreck an elf's career, marriage and reputation, not to mention the risk of being lynched by vigilantes, encouraged by the emperor's vile propaganda.) The best solution was to erase log files regularly. This may be rather difficult for Microsoft operating systems, which are utterly hopeless pieces of crap when it comes to security and privacy (see e.g.: "Defeating Encrypted and Deniable File Systems: TrueCrypt v5.1a and the Case of the Tattling OS and Applications"). For Linux however, it is easy to write a script to remove all log files upon logout. To determine which files and directories to remove, the home directory should be scrutinised, especially the filenames starting with a period. Another issue is the /tmp/ directory, which can often be cleared automatically upon logout by choosing appropriate personal settings.
Further, privacy settings of browsers can be made to erase browsing history, cache, cookies, etc., upon exit.
Also elves who were not into butterflies preferred to use deniable encryption for all their data, because the paranoid emperor ended up seeing butterflies in the most harmless grocery lists.
Full-disk encryption with plausible deniability solves the problem of securely storing information, but not of how to confidentially exchange data with others. This requires more care, and in particular public-key encryption via e.g. PGP (GPG on Linux). One can even stay anonymous by using the TOR network and related tools (see the links at Citizen Lab).

Valkyrie

2009-01-24T13:18:00.000-08:00

There is no good reason to go see this film, starring Scientology wacko Tom Cruise. Hollywood as usual sacrifices good taste, common sense, and in this case also historical accuracy, all for the sake of sensation and fake sentiments. See e.g. review (Deutsche Welle) and review (Guardian).

To those who do not belong to the stifling Anglocentric majority unable to tolerate the sound of a foreign language, I would strongly recommend a much more honest, and still gripping, rendering of the Von Stauffenberg episode, originally produced for German television (ARD):

Stauffenberg (2004), at IMDb

A quick web search suggests that the version with English subtitles is currently unavailable on DVD, but one could try finding it on the internet. (Google for: Stauffenberg "S Koch" DVD.)

Hidden

2008-12-26T21:43:00.000-08:00

I finally got around to watching Caché by Michael Haneke, without a doubt the best film I've seen in years. Moreover, it made me aware of the Paris massacre of 1961, an event I admit to my great shame I'd never even heard of until last week.

Might there be parallels between France in 1961 and Britain today? In both cases, an abject war abroad triggers domestic turmoil, including terrorism committed by a small minority. In both cases, the powers that be decide that under these circumstances, human rights are to be suspended, if not in law then in practice. In both cases, the police are unaccountable; no one has ever been convicted of the Paris massacre, as no one has been convicted of the killing of De Menezes and no police officer has received even the slightest reprimand for any of the many thousands of baseless arrests, search warrants and other forms of harassment of what turn out to be innocent people, under 'anti-terrorism' laws that lack any moral or other justification. As in France in the 1960s, the press is all too eager to do its 'duty' demonising those breaking the law, while glorifying the law enforcement agencies that protect us, our children and our way of life.

If none of this makes any sense and the analogies are false, then forget all this, except that the film is highly recommended.

'More sex offenders' go missing

2008-12-26T13:08:00.000-08:00

'More sex offenders' go missing (BBC News, Tuesday, 23 December 2008)

The horror! Do the missing sex offenders include the man convicted of having sex with a bicycle (BBC News, Friday, 16 November 2007)? Better lock up your bike sheds then!

Child protection charities warned it was common for sex offenders to re-offend

Define 'common'. Some types of sex offence have the lowest reconviction rates among all crimes, according to government statistics, which regrettably leave out of consideration those cases where the victims were bicycles, shoes, traffic cones, or other inanimate objects involved in recent convictions.

The above article should be seen against the backdrop of a growing awareness that the sex offenders register as it is maintained in the UK breaches human rights:

Sex offenders win rights ruling (BBC News, Friday, 19 December 2008)

Of course, it is not politically correct to talk about this. And think about the poor underage Vettas, Konas and Raleighs!

star of wonder

2008-12-25T17:17:00.000-08:00

My Christmas message? There's probably no God (Guardian, Tuesday 23 December 2008)

Polly Toynbee's article doesn't contain much that we didn't know before, but we need more of this as long as media such as the BBC continue to feed us theist crap like this, disguised as science reporting:

Star of wonder (BBC News, Tuesday, 23 December 2008)

Basically the same 'story' the BBC have been recycling year after year, e.g. December 24, 1998; February 23, 1999; November 28, 2003; December 22, 2005; May 8, 2006.

Ahmadinejad show causes offence

2008-12-25T16:42:00.000-08:00

Ahmadinejad show 'causes offence' (Thursday, 25 December 2008)

I don't watch Channel 4, nor the infantile rubbish on any of the other TV channels, but it seems that this year's alternative Christmas Message was particularly successful in exposing the hypocrisy rampant in this country. It is so much easier to throw predictable verbal abuse at an insane foreign leader than to come to terms with the embarrassment of having to further tolerate Gordon Brown's fruity club, possibly until June 2010, heaven forbid.

Allowing Iran's president to deliver Channel 4's Alternative Christmas Message will cause "international offence", the UK government has said.

... whereas the war in Iraq has caused no offence at all, least of all internationally.

The war has in fact significantly strengthened the position of hardliners in neighbouring Iran, among other things leading to the election of its current president. Considering we indirectly helped Ahmadinejad get his post, why would we not ask him to give us a speech?

"The British media are rightly free to make their own editorial choices, but [...]

The word 'but' pretty much sums up New Labour's position on freedom of expression and civil liberties. You little people have rights. But not really.

"Who will deliver next year's alternative Christmas message? Will it be David Irving or Robert Mugabe?"

I don't give a damn, as long as it is not Tony Blair. With one half of the British media spouting sexist, racist, xenophobic rant, and the other offering little more than docile, law-abiding platitudes never straying too far from the government's position, apparently it takes someone like Ahmadinejad to provoke a debate. Too bad.

opera is harmful

2008-12-21T07:49:00.000-08:00

BBC's Christmas Day Hansel and Gretel will show 'dead children' (Telegraph 12 Dec 2008)

(Found via Melonfarmers.)

Children's campaigners have criticised the BBC's decision to broadcast it at a time when young children will be watching. [...]

This is the most violent stuff young children will ever see on TV! And the blasted thing is sung in some weird language that normal people don't understand!

The Torygraph and self-proclaimed 'children's campaigners' would do anything to protect children from foreign culture. Right, let's stick our heads in the sand and pretend that if British children grow up to be violent or otherwise dysfunctional, it is because they once saw a non-Anglo-Saxon opera with puppets of dead people in it. It can't have anything to do with our educational system, the many violent cartoons on TV, our crypto-fascist government, or anything like that, can it? So, blame it on zee Germans!

In this age of cultural barbarism and instant gratification, the 0.001% of British children who can be bothered to watch any opera for more than 5 minutes may be expected to have the intelligence to cope with the discussed scenes.

On a happier note, I can highly recommend Humperdinck's delightful opera, for children and adults of all ages. If you miss the broadcast, or if it is cancelled thanks to xenophobic, self-important bigots, there is a wonderful recording on CD with Anna Moffo, Helen Donath, Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau and Kurt Eichhorn conducting.

Most 'do not believe in nativity'

2008-12-20T08:27:00.000-08:00

Most 'do not believe in nativity' (BBC News, Saturday, 20 December 2008)

I know the BBC see it as their task to cater for a wide audience, which includes those who suffer from organised delusion. That is no reason however to quote an 'expert' whose comments are very unlike those of a scholar and very much like those of a propagandist.

Simon Gathercole, a new testament scholar at Cambridge University, said people were sceptical because they were not aware the origins of Christianity were anchored in real history.

Looking at biblical writings from a sound historical perspective is the realm of biblical criticism, which, unlike theology, is a serious discipline. Its study of the origins of among other things the New Testament is often reported by believers (and former believers) to be a powerful antidote to literalism, as it lays bare the fatal weaknesses of any suggestions that events must have taken place exactly as reported in the four gospels from the New Testament.

"Jesus was born while Augustus was emperor of Rome just before Herod died... we're talking about events that are anchored in real history not in ancient Greek myths."

There is solid evidence that Mohammed actually existed, and did at least some of the things the Quran reports he did (which includes some quite nasty stuff, as everyone knows or should know), whereas very little is certain about the life of Jesus, except maybe that he must have been a much nicer bloke. Should we therefore take the Quran as the Word of God™, just because it is more archored in history than the New Testament is?

"There's something in us that misses that connection with God that we sometimes feel our historical forebears had," he said.

We? Speak for yourself. The great lie of our time is that atheism would have existed only since Charles Darwin. Although On the Origin of Species delivered the death blow to theism, at least among those in possession of full mental faculties, there is solid evidence that the 'connection with God' has been tenuous throughout the ages, and religious beliefs had to be hammered into the flock, by force, by threats of force, or merely by lies and trickery. The many crackpot 'proofs' for God's existence by Thomas Aquinas and hordes of other 'thinkers' from the middle ages only show just how familiar the concept of not believing in a god was to many people. And those who genuinely believed may not have had the same 'connection with God' as some sufferers of schizophrenia quoted by BBC News.

Merry Christmas by the way.

virtual reality

2008-12-12T11:09:00.000-08:00

Gordon Brown saved the world and a fake Simpsons cartoon is child abuse. Reality has ceased to be a relevant concept. More examples:

Stone jailed for Stormont attack (BBC News, Monday, 8 December 2008)

Stone had denied the charges, claiming the incident was performance art.

Spending time in prison is also performance art. It now appears the judge is an art lover.

How do avatars have sex? (BBC News, Friday, 14 November 2008)

So how do computerised characters have sex?

"First you need to buy genitals,"

Call me old-fashioned...

As usual, last month's prize for the most warped view on reality goes to the Labour government:

£1,000 fine for wrong ID details (BBC News, Friday, 21 November 2008)

the government plans to fine innocent people for inaccuracies on the government's own database

Open verdict at Menezes inquest (BBC News, Friday, 12 December 2008)

A gagged jury returns the only reasonable verdict that remains and the response by wacky Jacqui is:

What we have learnt from the accounts of the tragic events that day reminds us all of the extremely demanding circumstances under which the police work to protect us from further terrorist attack,

So if police shoot an innocent and unarmed civilian, then feel sorry for the police. Because the police are the police, and civilians are just civilians.

The Labour government is making it rather hard to still think of policeman as an honourable profession, a feeling that I may share with many thousands of others who have been the victim of random stop and search under Section 44(2) of the Terrorism Act, such as Terence Eden.

Arrogance, megalomania and sheer stupidity among the British police force are not restricted to the Menezes killing. The following is nowhere as serious, but it is symptomatic that anyone with the slightest understanding of computer security falls on the floor laughing when they read comments from a computer 'expert' of the police force:

UK police: 'We need crime breathalysers for PCs' (Silicon.com, 11 December 2008)

Councils are using 'lie detectors' about as reliable as the ancient Roman practice of inspecting the entrails of sacrificed animals (but less bloody):

Lie detectors for benefit claims (BBC News, Thursday, 4 December 2008)

When it comes to distinguishing make-believe from reality, there is a glimmer of hope. For the first time in years, the word 'piracy' is used for what it means, rather than as a catch-all for anything that makes the music, movie and game industries lose revenues from the sale of overpriced rubbish:

US asks UN to allow pirate hunters into Somalia (Guardian, Friday 12 December 2008)

censored Wikipedia image

2008-12-08T17:04:00.000-08:00

Wikipedia child image censored (BBC News, Monday, 8 December 2008)

Wikipedia page censored in the UK for 'child pornography' (Guardian blog, 8 December 2008)

I don't exactly enjoy living in a country where people are put in jail every day by narrow-minded and self-righteous judges and magistrates, for an ever increasing number of victimless crimes, thought up by a maniacal government intent on obliterating every last shred of our civil liberties. But it is an outright affront to freedom and democracy that government-funded bodies operating outside the control of the judicial system decide what is good for us to see, hear and read.

Forms of censorship that are not answerable to anyone are at the basis of every dictatorship, and countries that are democratic, at least in name, have become a lot less so because of such censorship. Those who dare speak out are often themselves censored, as in the case of Lapsiporno:

Finnish government blacklists 'free speech' site (CNET news, February 18, 2008)

In Britain, internet censorship is implemented by the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), which was initially only concerned with identifying child abuse websites. Through the function-creep that is inevitable with such organisations, they then started to widen their scope to material that they deemed objectionable for a variety of reasons, from obscenity to incitement to racist violence (BBC News, Friday, 24 October 2008), and all major ISPs now adopt their blacklists blindly. No one except the government and ISPs have access to the blacklist, which makes the IWF unaccountable. The censored material will of course also cover (and likely now already covers) "extreme porn", in the light of new legislation:

Porn, abuse, depravity - and how they plan to stop it (The Register, 9th October 2008)

Government finally names the day for porn ban (The Register, 26th November 2008)

backlash-uk.org.uk

The case at hand involves an album cover from 1976, which is of historical interest, notwithstanding its bad taste, and unless the decision to blacklist the image is withdrawn soon, Britain will become the laughingstock of the (supposedly) free world even more than it already is.

If you cannot access the Wikipedia page, then it is advisable to change your provider to a decent one that doesn't play ball with the nanny state, or use a proxy situated in the free world, or to be more exact, anywhere except Britain, Australia and North Korea. (Check out Relakks and Anonymouse.org.) Alternatively, you can see the controversial album cover here or here or here or here or here of here. That is, if you're curious what the fuss is about, and are not shocked by a naked body!

If you haven't had enough yet, check out Le Sommeil de l'Enfant Jésus by Benvenuto Tisi. Every day, hordes of paedophiles go on a pilgrimage to the Louvre to see it.

And what to think of The Three Graces, either the painting by Raphael or the sculpture by Antonio Canova. Those girls look rather underage don't they?

You want bondage thrown in as well? No problem. See The White Captive by Erastus Dow Palmer.

But hush! Don't tell the IWF, or a large portion of classical and neo-classical sculpture will be ostracised, only to be appreciated by a handful of scholars, authorised after thorough psychological testing that qualifies them to see such depraved and depraving material.

By the way, our friends down under are in an even worse predicament than we are. But it won't be long till we catch up:

Fake Simpsons cartoon 'is porn' (BBC News, Monday, 8 December 2008)

In Conroy’s muddy waters you'll never know what’s being filtered (Computerworld, 28/10/2008)

www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com

Addendum:

For an update and thorough analysis, recommended reading is:

Scorpions tale leaves IWF exposed (The Register, 9th December 2008)

Addendum 2:

IWF backs down on Wiki censorship (BBC News, Tuesday, 9 December 2008)

"IWF's overriding objective is to minimise the availability of indecent images of children on the internet, however, on this occasion our efforts have had the opposite effect. We regret the unintended consequences for Wikipedia and its users."

So they couldn't foresee that blocking a Wikipedia page (and other collateral damage) would upset people? One cannot but wonder what incompetent fools are behind that organisation. It is very plausible that more harmless, or at least legal, images and textual material have ended up on the blacklist that we don't know about.

One of these days, some hacker will get hold of the blacklist, and distribute it on the web, thereby giving paedophiles the most concentrated list of filth in existence, and as we all know, the offending websites are and will always remain accessible with a minimum of technical know-how, by means of proxies, the TOR network, etc. How's that for "unintended consequences"?

The IWF is a serious threat to free speech, while having no effect whatsoever on the availability of child abuse material to those intent on finding it. Close the IWF down, now!

Addendum 3:

There are in fact now leaked blacklists for Denmark (Melonfarmers, Dec 24, 2008), Thailand (CircleID, Dec 2, 2008), and Finland as mentioned above.

Pope urged to admit common ground

2008-11-12T16:48:00.000-08:00

Pope urged to admit common ground (BBC News, Tuesday, 4 November 2008)

When 138 senior Muslim scholars and clergy tried to establish the common ground between Islam and Christianity last year, they said the very peace of the world hung on the outcome.

So we're all doomed!

The idea that we should look to religion as the source of world peace has lost its last shred of credibility a long, long time ago, and the opposite seems much closer to the truth. The alleged motives behind the creation of a body claiming to represent all Muslims in Europe should receive a fair amount of scepticism, whether one represents the Pope or whether one is an atheist in possession of full mental faculties.

See also:

Is Europe Trying to Build a Fundamentalist Islam? (by Prof. Philip Jenkins, Pennsylvania State University; Qantara.de, 04.11.2008)

When governments recognize particular clerical and religious groups as the official spokesmen for their communities, they are treating ordinary people as members of collective religious/cultural entities, holding rights as members of those groups, not as citizens and individuals.

Prince hopes to pass on charities

2008-11-12T15:47:00.000-08:00

Prince hopes to pass on charities (BBC News, Wednesday, 12 November 2008)

He said he hoped one day people would realise "that some of the things I've been trying to do aren't all that mad".

That a toxic substance would obtain medicinal value when it is diluted to such an extent as if it were one pulverised grain of rice in a sphere of water the size of the solar system (including Pluto), and this repeated two billion times, this idea is not stark raving mad. I repeat: not stark raving mad. Because Prince Charles said so.

Heartily recommended viewing:

James Randi explains homeopathy

which is part of:

James Randi Lecture at Princeton 2001

Addendum

Not to be missed:

Richard Dawkins interviews Prof. Michael Baum (RichardDawkins.net, December 22, 2008)

Out of body or all in the mind?

2008-11-02T13:37:00.000-08:00

Out of body or all in the mind? (BBC News, Friday, 24 October 2008)

There we go again. The last article on this topic didn't include enough woo-woo yet.

He explained: "We know that in the sub-atomic world, smaller than atoms - things behave in really bizarre ways we don't understand, they call it quantum physics.

For any responsible journalist with a little knowledge of science and non-science, alarm bells should start ringing at the first mention of quantum physics in a context where it has no business. But no, phrases such as:

but dealing with these patients when he worked in an intensive care unit, has forced him to challenge his own scepticism.

are used to try to pull down any natural defences that BBC News readers might have against supernatural claptrap.

To the BBC's credit, they do cite Susan Blackmore, world-renowned skeptic and expert on near-death experiences. But woo-woo must prevail, so the final words are:

"When I die I'm going to go somewhere else. I'm 110% what I saw is what I saw."

redneck

2008-11-02T13:31:00.000-08:00

Redneck support for Obama (BBC News, Sunday, 2 November 2008)

According to the American Heritage Dictionary, via dictionary.com:

red·neck

n. Offensive Slang

Used as a disparaging term for a member of the white rural laboring class, especially in the southern United States
A white person regarded as having a provincial, conservative, often bigoted attitude.

I can see the interviewee has tattoos, but why does he deserve to be called a redneck? Several royalty, such as Harold II of England, Edward VII, and George V all had tattoos. Were they rednecks? And why is it 'news' if one person with ink in his dermis hands out bumper stickers in favour of Obama?

As so often, it appears the BBC have recruited too many 'journalists' who will produce any rubbish to reach their quotas.

'No God' slogans

2008-10-21T13:15:00.000-07:00

'No God' slogans for city's buses (BBC News, Tuesday, 21 October 2008)

"I should be surprised if a quasi-religious advertising campaign like this did not attract graffiti.

Can Stephen 'Birdshit' Green not be prosecuted for incitement to cause damage to property? Or is his phrasing not direct enough for that? In that case, I should be surprised if, after this ludicrous statement, the attributes of Green's own theist campaigns did not attract graffiti.

This is a good occasion to witness again that not all religions and branches of religions are created equal:

Spirituality and discipleship officer Rev Jenny Ellis said: "This campaign will be a good thing if it gets people to engage with the deepest questions of life."

She added: "Christianity is for people who aren't afraid to think about life and meaning."

It should be 'interesting' to hear the views of the Muslim Council of Britain on this matter. But don't bother.

Addendum:

The 'veiled' threats by Green are in fact more concrete than the BBC News article might suggest. He even includes a practical hint related to causing said damage, where he writes, at Christian Voice:

'I should be surprised if a quasi-religious advertising campaign like this did not attract graffiti. People don't like being preached at. Sometimes it does them good, but they still don't like it. The advertising space on a bendy-bus is just the right height as well.

Perhaps it should be pointed out that legislation on hate crimes also covers theist incitement to commit crimes against atheists, according to www.homeoffice.gov.uk:

This law, which came into effect in 2007, makes it a criminal offence to use threatening words or behaviour with the intention of stirring up hatred against any group of people because of their religious beliefs or their lack of religious beliefs.

Airliner had near miss with UFO

2008-10-20T03:49:00.000-07:00

Airliner had near miss with UFO (BBC News, Monday, 20 October 2008)

As so often in these kinds of BBC News stories, it is difficult to find falsehoods, and the cited expert is an 'open-minded sceptic', whose past work on UFOs and UFOlogy has been sound and helpful. Nevertheless, the weak of mind may well take the title and some paragraphs as support of the claim that extraterrestrials are fucking with us.

The phrase "it is career suicide to have your name associated with UFOs" suggests existence of self-censorship keeping the truth from being discovered, and it may be all too tempting for believers to take the phrase "and make your mind up" and the comments form at the end of the article as supportive of a relativistic stance.

children and fools cannot lie

2008-10-19T19:18:00.000-07:00

'People doing drugs is really bad' (BBC News, Sunday, 5 October 2008)

In time, things turned even nastier. Bricks were thrown through their windows and they suffered an attempted break-in.

Chinese government propaganda against Falun Gong uses basically the same techniques. "Little girl meets family practising that evil religion, and before long, bricks are thrown through the windows." QED: Falun Gong is really bad. After all, who wouldn't believe a little girl?

Different issues, same stupid rhetoric. Thank you, BBC, for treating us like adults. By the way, how many journalists from the former Fernsehen der DDR did you recruit after 1989?

there's weird and there's weird

2008-10-19T17:23:00.000-07:00

Healer methods doubted by expert (BBC News, Wednesday, 8 October 2008)

Professor Ernst, professor of complementary and alternative medicine at Exeter University, was asked about evidence from the woman about how Mr Hands had touched her.

[...]

Prof Ernst told the court that the methods she described were "not part of lymphatic drainage of the groin".

Curious. The guilt of the quack seems to depend on whether his holistic healing methods are more wacky than holistic healing methods are anyway. My understanding was that if reason goes out the window, then nothing is too weird. The legal profession apparently has a different view.

sex in public

2008-10-19T17:11:00.000-07:00

Sex-on-beach trial Britons guilty (BBC News, Thursday, 16 October 2008)

Those cursed Muslims in Dubai with their outdated morals! We in Britain are more open-minded. Aren't we? Well, apparently the following is still not self-evident:

Police leniency call on park sex (BBC News, Friday, 17 October 2008)

quantum cryptography

2008-10-19T16:49:00.000-07:00

'Unbreakable' encryption unveiled (BBC News, Thursday, 9 October 2008)

Experts in the field of computer security are aware that quantum cryptography is an answer in search of a question. But let reality not spoil a good story.

Recommended reading is:

Quantum Cryptography: As Awesome As It Is Pointless by Bruce Schneier (Wired, 10.16.08)

afrocentrism

2008-10-19T16:28:00.000-07:00

What does medicine owe to Africa? (BBC News, Friday, 17 October 2008)

But there is a debate to be had about why Indian and Chinese medicines which you can get on the High Street, but African medicine is still very much a taboo subject.

Perhaps that is because there is no such thing as "African medicine", no more than there is an "African culture" or an "African race". Equating Ancient Egypt to Africa, and overstating cultural and scientific achievements by peoples from Africa in ancient times is known as afrocentrism, a pseudo-science especially rampant in the US, where it is now considered offensive to point out that the Egyptian kings were in general not black (the Meroitic kings were an exception). If the BBC News article was not written by an afrocentrist pur sang, you could have fooled me.

See also:

Fallacies of Afrocentrism by Grover Furr (Montclair State University)

Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax

2008-10-19T15:52:00.000-07:00

Why you should avoid 'mingqutnguaq' (BBC News, Saturday, 18 October 2008)

It seems BBC News has now started recycling news that must be at least 25 years old, which includes perpetuating an urban myth. The justification seems to be little more than a new video of a native Inuit blabbing about snow and ice.

The idea that Eskimo languages have many more words for snow than an average language from a culture familiar with sub-zero temperatures is known as the Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax, and dates from the beginning of the 20th century. It was debunked by anthropologist Laura Martin in the 1980s. See also:

Pullum, Geoffrey K. (1991). The Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax and other
Irreverent Essays on the Study of Language. University of Chicago Press.

Where are they when you need them?

2008-09-29T17:49:00.000-07:00

Ecstasy downgrade is considered (BBC News, Friday, 26 September 2008)

As part of the discussions, panel members will consider the submission from the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), stating that transferring ecstasy to class B would send out an "unfortunate message".

Instead of giving unhelpful advice contradicting scientific evidence, would the police perhaps care to go after the bad guys? Apparently not, not if the bad guys have money and power:

Police close file on BT's trials (BBC News, Thursday, 25 September 2008)

CNN

2008-09-29T16:46:00.000-07:00

The BBC is not yet as bad as CNN. Just checking:

Tomkat protests (CNN, September 22, 2008)

Brooke Whatever:

Anti-Scientology protesters chanted "Scientology kills" [...]

April Somethingorother:

I mean, considering that these people are protesting with masks and their name is Anonymous, Tom and Katie are probably thinking: "Come up with a real name!"

Brooke Whatever:

HA-HA-HA-GIGGLE-GIGGLE!

The protesters want to remain anonymous and wear masks because Scientology pursues its critics, short of employing polonium-210. Try explaining to cunts from CNN Showbiz that some people go out of their way to make the world a better place, and that this does not include reporting on which celebrity accidentally exposed how many nipples during which award ceremony.

In a next post, I may write about Larry King, also known as the King of Paranormal, giving free publicity to 'psychics' and other scum. But then again, I may find I don't have the stomach for watching more of this rubbish.

Addendum (2008-09-30):

As some are apparently offended by my mentioning Scientology, here is something to make it up:

Being Tom Cruise : How Scientology is in No Way Mental

unlawfully killed

2008-09-29T12:52:00.000-07:00

Inquest told of pressure on Met (BBC News, Monday, 29 September 2008)

The inquest is being held at London's Oval cricket ground and the jury will consider whether or not the Brazilian electrician was unlawfully killed.

No matter how often I read about the public execution of Jean Charles de Menezes, I find myself raising my eyebrows every time I come across the phrase "unlawfully killed". Perhaps I'm a linguistic simpleton unable to appreciate the subtle legal meaning of the word "unlawful". But how could it possibly be lawful to shoot an innocent man in the head? Seven times? With hollow point bullets? At point-blank range, and after he had been restrained?

Millionaire spooked from mansion

2008-09-21T13:27:00.000-07:00

Millionaire spooked from mansion (BBC News, Sunday, 21 September 2008)

Paranormal experts were unable to solve the problem.

WTF?!

With many people still relying on the BBC as their main news source, no wonder democracy in the UK is under such a strain.

What's next? Horoscopes and Elvis sightings?

Addendum:

Audio slideshow: The art of mathematics

Why do people waste their time with ghost stories, woo-woo medicine, religion and all that bunk when there is science?

Sex offenders to face lie tests

2008-09-20T06:23:00.000-07:00

Sex offenders to face lie tests (BBC News, Friday, 19 September 2008)

It won't be long until we can read in the newspapers:

Labour to replace police investigations by 16th century witch-hunting methods

Decades of experience with polygraphs used by the US federal government have established that the high number of false negatives and the high number of false positives make the method useless for any purpose whatsoever. For example, all those who were tested and later turned out to be spies had passed the test successfully, while the careers of several innocent people were ruined after they failed a lie detector test.

Polygraph examiners are the lowest of the low. With their bogus claims to possess magical powers of truth finding, they are as deceitful and fraudulent as dowsers, psychics, chiropractors, homoeopaths, and senior members of the Labour Party. Letting them have any function at all in any kind of legal process will cause immeasurable damage. Innocent people will be made to suffer because of false positives, and a misplaced sense of security in the case of false negatives will endanger potential victims.

Once more it is demonstrated that people's brains stop functioning as soon as an issue involves child abuse. No one in Britain would propose use of polygraphs in the case of mass murder, terrorism, or the treason committed by Blair and Brown over the war in Iraq. So why is it okay to apply polygraphs to sex offenders? Because with their conviction, they forfeited their human rights for all eternity? Then why not reintroduce trial by drowning? That would be the ultimate solution to keeping these freaks away from our children.

Study into near-death experiences

2008-09-20T06:16:00.000-07:00

Study into near-death experiences (BBC News, Thursday, 18 September 2008)

Doctors at 25 UK and US hospitals will study 1,500 survivors to see if people with no heartbeat or brain activity can have "out of body" experiences.

No one doubts that people can have such experiences. But having an out-of-body experience (OBE) does not mean that the mind can detach itself from the body, floating about the operating room looking from above upon the surgeons and upon the corporeal self. It is clear the knucklehead who wrote this piece doesn't understand the basic vocabulary of near-death studies.

The study, due to take three years and co-ordinated by Southampton University, will include placing on shelves images that could only be seen from above.

Very interesting, but from the cited comments by the researchers it is clear they themselves do not find it very plausible that anything (mind, consciousness, soul, whatever) would actually leave the body during an OBE. A number of neuro-biological factors have been identified that may well cause OBEs and other near-death experiences, and I imagine the proposed studies will attempt to shed more light on these primarily.

One could have presented this story with an emphasis on medical science, but no, BBC News goes straight for the woo-woo.

former monopolies

2008-09-16T16:15:00.000-07:00

I am getting annoying phone calls from British Gas again, from this dreaded number: 08450700827. It turns out that anyone who dares to move to another supplier from British Gas will be harassed even more, with silent calls as punishment for desertion. So never ever get involved with British Gas in the first place, or you might regret it for years to come. Their service is crap anyway.

Then there is:

UK government responds on Phorm (BBC News, Tuesday, 16 September 2008)

"After conducting its enquiries with Phorm the UK authorities consider that Phorm's products are capable of being operated in a lawful, appropriate and transparent fashion," said a Berr statement.

The scumbags at BT who concocted the Phorm trials, thereby violating the privacy of about 18,000 customers, should be in jail. But the government thinks everything is hunky-dory. What's wrong with spying on people? We do it all the time ourselves!

If you can't leave this cursed country, then at least stay away from BT as far as you can. Also avoid Virgin Media and TalkTalk. You want an ISP that has the interests of its customers at heart rather than any shady deals with advertisers. See also:

Phorm: Our business is fine, honest (The Register, 4th September 2008)

Update (2008-09-22):

Since last time, I've received several more calls from British Gas, some of which were silent. I'm trying to find the magical formula to keep them at bay. So far I've tried "Thank you very much but please do not call me anymore", "sod off", "drop dead", and "drop dead after suffering from a horrible disease". No success so far.

double standards

2008-09-15T18:06:00.000-07:00

A selection from today's news:

Driver jailed for killing couple (BBC News, Monday, 15 September 2008)

RAF Iraq base deaths 'unlawful' (BBC News, Monday, 15 September 2008)

A driver is jailed for two years and four months over a split-second lapse in concentration.

Blair, Brown and several others who conspired to start a disastrous war that has cost the lives of 176 British soldiers, and many, many more innocent Iraqis, may never face justice.

Bus driver stalker spared prison (BBC News, Monday, 15 September 2008)

Minister 'set to quit' over Brown (BBC News, Monday, 15 September 2008)

The BBC has no qualms about publishing names and intimate details concerning a case of obsessive love, including the name of the victim. (No photo today, but one can be sure they tried to obtain one.)

The BBC allows a minister who is playing political games in the Labour government to remain unnamed.

The British police, who are so eager to pursue all who step out of line whether they actually break the law or not, demonstrate their own incompetence:

Police admit to lost data blunder (BBC News, Monday, 15 September 2008)

Why are there so few female conductors?

2008-09-13T05:09:00.000-07:00

Why are there so few female conductors? (BBC News, Friday, 12 September 2008)

Another article that is more politically correct than informative, by avoiding all thorny issues.

THE ANSWER
* Long tradition of male conductors proving hard to shake off

With all due respect to Marin Alsop, to whom we owe a number of truly outstanding performances, female conductors are nothing new. The great Nadia Boulanger appeared as conductor of several major American orchestras in the 1930s. (How could they write a piece about female conductors without mentioning her?) In Britain around the same time there was Ethel Leginska.

There is a long tradition of female concert pianists, starting with Clara Schumann. Is there gender equality among the top 50 most celebrated pianists of the world today? I don't think so. Off the cuff, I suspect the situation is more balanced for top violinists, whereas there were few noted female violinists before 1900.

* Many conductors don't reach their peak until later life
* Top females still working up through system

That's it? This three point answer explains why there are so few female conductors? Would the same answer be given if asked why there are so few women CEOs? Just a matter of tradition, and in time it will even out?

Of course there are more important factors behind gender inequality in many professions, especially those that carry prestige. Some of these factors are 'nurture', and others, whether we like it or not, are 'nature'. Conjecturing about the relative importance of these factors without having done adequate research would reveal more about one's prejudices than about reality. But one thing is clear: the usual escapism of BBC News won't get us any nearer to real answers.

Woman jailed for sex with boy

2008-09-12T15:36:00.000-07:00

Woman jailed for sex with boy, 15 (BBC News, Friday, 12 September 2008)

Here we go again. Apparently jails aren't full enough yet.

As in the case two weeks ago, there was consensual sex, and the father had nothing better to do than snoop on his offspring, who might have been months, days or seconds away from the age of consent.

Passing sentence Judge Peter Jacobs told her: "If this was a 35-year-old man and a 15-year-old girl no one would raise an eyebrow if he was sent to prison."

I would. And I don't understand the reasoning. Did she deserve 15 months in jail for reasons of gender equality?

The court heard there was no victim impact statement as he had been a willing party.

So this is a victimless crime? Why are victimless crimes punished so harshly in this country? Is there a rational explanation for this?

"His parents have been very upset," Mrs Tucker added.

So it is really the parents who are the victims. Just let the implications sink in for a moment.

TV licence fee tactics

2008-09-08T13:38:00.001-07:00

Review of TV licence fee tactics (BBC News, Monday, 8 September 2008)

He was particularly angry at the requirement for people who do not own
televisions - some one million people in Britain - to prove their "non-use".

It is typical for the BBC to repeat misleading information when their own interests are at stake. People who do not watch television don't have to prove anything, although they may be harassed a bit if they don't. (Note furthermore that one should distinguish between "own a television" and "watch television".)

If a TV Licensing agent calls, don't open the door. If you've already opened the door, smile friendly if you must, and then close the door again. Don't say anything, especially not your name! Everything you say can and will be used against you and so on. If they call more often than once every 6 months or so, withdraw their implied right of access (under an assumed name if they don't know your name already).

These TV Licensing agents are not police and have no special powers, despite their frequent lies to suggest otherwise. Only if they come with a search warrant do you have to let them in, and then they will usually be accompanied by a police officer. For once, regard that police officer as your friend. His or her presence will keep the TV Licensing creep from opening the drawer with your undies and sniffing where he's not allowed to.

If you happen to have a video camera lying around, film the event. Don't believe them if they tell you you can't film in your own home. Make it as embarrassing for them as it is for you, but without actually hindering the search. You must also comply with any reasonable request to assist the search. But for goodness sake, don't sign anything, under any circumstances and whatever they tell you!

Unless you watch television with the curtains open, TV Licensing officers don't usually go so far as to seek a search warrant. In a truly free, civilised society, it wouldn't happen that one of them convinces some dork of a magistrate that there are reasonable grounds for believing that you watch television while you don't. But regrettably, we live in Britain. The real problem here is of course the legal system as a whole, but that's a different story.

As to the letters from TV Licensing you receive about every two months, just throw them away unopened. Reading them is bad for your health, I've been told.

Sarah Palin

2008-09-07T17:39:00.000-07:00

Pray to the Flying Spaghetti Monster that the Yanks will make the right choice in November, or we might soon have another nut in the White House.

If you haven't seen it yet, watch the video and shudder:

Palin: average isn't good enough (at RichardDawkins.net)

Addendum (2008-09-22):

When Atheists Attack (by Sam Harris, at RichardDawkins.net)

our civil liberties or our wallets?

2008-09-07T07:56:00.000-07:00

'Environmental volunteers' will be encouraged to spy on their neighbours (Telegraph, 02 Sep 2008)

Anti-terrorism laws used to spy on noisy children (Telegraph, 06 Sep 2008)

Children aged eight enlisted as council snoopers (Telegraph, 06 Sep 2008)

Child sleuths 'are not snoopers' (BBC News, Saturday, 6 September 2008)

Some observations:

First, the justified expressions of discontent if not outrage everywhere on the web in response to the above news may be ultimately driven by the worsening economic climate, which is mostly to blame on global factors rather than on Labour's incompetence. The surveillance state has been unfolding itself for several years now. Why are people waking up at this moment? Why were there no mass demonstrations five years ago, or as far back as eight years ago, when some of our most fundamental human rights were annulled? Remember that the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Bill is from 2000, and wide-ranging extensions are from 2003. But our economy wasn't doing so badly then, and any financial adversity could always be blamed on the EU.

Secondly, even if the present government is overthrown tomorrow by an angry mob, and its senior members are tarred and feathered, they might be elected again at the next occasion, after a future Tory government will inevitably fuck up too, unable to find their place to the right of Labour on the political spectrum, and unable to turn the tide on our economy. Such is the memory of the average constituent.

Lastly, given that the news comes from the Daily Telegraph, could there be an element of opportunism from the side of the Tories?

Tories condemn rise in number of civilians given police powers (Guardian, Wednesday August 27 2008)

Still remember how civil liberties existed in perfect harmony with the fight on crime and terrorism in times when the Conservatives were in power? Neither do I. See e.g.:

British Detention Law Is Ruled a Breach of Rights (The New York Times, November 30, 1988)

One more noteworthy link:

'Spying' requests exceed 500,000 (BBC News, Tuesday, 22 July 2008)

grammar

2008-09-06T13:17:00.000-07:00

20 examples of grammar misuse (BBC News, Wednesday, 3 September 2008)

Having strong opinions about grammar is of all nationalities and of all ages. Having strong opinions while being wrong requires a special breed. See the annotated items.

Spy software snares child abuser

2008-09-06T12:07:00.000-07:00

Spy software snares child abuser (BBC News, Tuesday, 2 September 2008)

There is not much about this case in the press, and perhaps the offender is really pure evil and the victim is pure innocence. The only practical way to criminalise child abuse is to set an age of consent, which according to my sources happens to be 12 in Malta, 14 in Austria, 15 in France, and 18 in Turkey. The case reported here is clearly statutory rape in the UK, as the girl was not yet 16. (By how many months or how many days?)

This said, am I a vile monster myself if I feel some compassion for this guy who is being sent to jail for 4.5 years? Having sex is what has saved the human race from extinction, and urges programmed into our genes tend to take precedence over social conventions about, for example, age difference. Moreover, the reality seems to be that a third of British teens have sex below the age of consent (Third 'have sex below legal age', BBC News, 13 Aug 06), and for gay teens this may be more than half (Report Finds 58% of Gay Teens Have Sex Before Legal Age of 16, UKGayNews, 1 December 2006).

Incidentally, judging from our overcrowded prisons (e.g. Scots jail numbers at record high, BBC News, Friday, 29 August 2008), it seems that either Britons are more inclined to commit crimes than our neighbours oversees, or most people in UK jails don't deserve to be there, due to an antiquated legal system and self-righteous legislators who think that all that is undesirable will go away if only penalties are high enough, irrespective of any sense of justice.

Of course, in the present climate of child abuse hysteria, it is no longer allowed to consider such matters rationally. This holds in the UK as much as in the US, cf. the Rind et al. controversy. Further recommended reading is Predator Panic: A Closer Look by Benjamin Radford, Skeptical Inquirer 30(5). In France we saw the Outreau trial a few years ago.

Back to the original BBC News article: If an attempt was made to provide a balanced view on the trial, it wasn't successful. Could it be that the father who installed spy software on his daughter's computer was himself a bit off his rocker? This doesn't sound very sane to me:

I picked up the software for £60 and is the best thing I have ever bought and is now on all my children's PCs.

Poor children. Will they sustain more permanent trauma from the consequences of their budding sexuality or from being continuously spied on by their parents?

This is a good occasion to reread:

Girl to get tracker implant to ease parents' fears (The Guardian, Tuesday September 3 2002)

A less gullible source is:

Cap Cyborg to chip 11 year old in wake of UK child killings (The Register, Monday 2nd September 2002)

Want to mould people into a surveillance society? Start early!

WWII body

2008-09-06T08:09:00.000-07:00

'It seemed to be a body from WWII' (BBC News, Thursday, 4 September 2008)

Papua 'remains' are not WWII body (BBC News, Friday, 5 September 2008)

Did you think the BBC would wait one day for confirmation before publishing a sensationalist story that turns out to be complete bollocks?

aren't we brave

2008-09-06T07:17:00.000-07:00

Muhammad novel set for UK release (BBC News, Thursday, 4 September 2008)

American publishers were too chicken to release this novel, and also a Serbian publisher was forced to pull the title (US Book Stirs Debate in Europe on Self-Censorship and Islam, Deutsche Welle, 19-08-2008). The British were called in to restore freedom of expression. Hurrah!

Well, not so fast. It seems the only thing that scared Random House into scrapping the novel was a review from an 'expert' on Islam who had never even been to the Middle East. Recall:

Prophet Muhammad novel scrapped (BBC News, Saturday, 9 August 2008)

It takes an American reviewer to assume that what is offensive to the Western mind (a 52 year old man having sex with a 9 year old girl) must be offensive to the entire Muslim world. Statements by the author herself (e.g. "Anyone who reads the book will see that it honours the prophet and his favourite wife") do not exclude the possibility the book is meant as glorification of part of the history of Islam. Until the novel is released, we can only guess.

See also the column:

The Wages of Fear kill The Jewel of Medina (New Europe, 1 September 2008)

The Danish (three cheers for them!) are perhaps the only people in the world at the moment who wouldn't let their freedom of expression be compromised by Islamophobia:

Danish publisher hopes to publish 'inflammatory' Islam novel (Guardian, Tuesday August 26 2008)

Now from pulp literature to something that actually matters: our health. If it weren't for Quackometer, the UK-skeptics, and several other blogs, we would never have known about the latest assault by charlatans on the freedom of speech, in this case chiroquacks, who try to silence author Dr. Simon Singh by suing him for libel over his article 'Beware the spinal trap' in The Guardian on April 19th 2008, in which he exposes chiropractic for the laughable sham it is. Moreover, The Guardian has pulled the article. (But thanks to Svetlana Pertsovich, there is an internet-cached copy.)

That chirofascists go after anyone who dares criticise their fraudulent practices is nothing new. By their own admission (pp. 6-7 of News from General Chiropractic Council, issue 23, March 08), they have in the past bullied several newspapers (The Guardian, The Daily Mail and The Daily Telegraph) into either watering down their critical comments to insignificance or into removing a critical article altogether, replacing it by chiropractic propaganda. They have resorted to similar legal intimidation in Canada and New Zealand.

But what is truly shocking is that news about this censorship is in turn being (self-)censored. That a newspaper is forced to pull an article because of a legal threat should be headline news, but somehow it isn't, not in Britain. It is perhaps not surprising that the Guardian itself hasn't provided any justification for removing the article, as their legal department may have advised against making any further comments. But how many other newspapers have reported this story? The Times? No! The Independent? Nope! BBC News? Only in your dreams would these weasels stick their necks out over a controversial issue! Daily Mail, Daily Express, Mirror, Sun? You must be kidding! I've found only one mention in the 'old media', and that reads as a pro-chiropractic piece, devoid of any critical thinking:

Doctors take Simon Singh to court (Telegraph, 16 Aug 2008)

The British press sucks.

GM crops

2008-08-26T16:44:00.000-07:00

Trying to catch up with the news from the past few weeks:

Charles in GM 'disaster' warning (BBC News, Wednesday, 13 August 2008)

Prince 'must prove anti-GM claim' (BBC News, Sunday, 17 August 2008)

The world is facing an increasing number of famines, and GM crops may provide some relief, potentially saving millions of lives. But concerns over the safety have been raised, and if the worries are justified, again millions of lives could be at stake.

As I'm not a biologist, I will have to rely on the judgement of experts. If reputable scientists say that GM food crops pose a considerable risk, then perhaps we should ban GM crops. If Prince Homoeoquack says that GM food crops pose a considerable risk, then perhaps we should abolish the monarchy.

next generations

2008-08-25T17:46:00.000-07:00

I've been to Vienna. Just what the doctor ordered. Among many other things, I enjoyed hearing three young women playing in the street as string trio. I suspect they were music students earning a little money on the side. They played e.g. Piazzolla with a skill and enthusiasm one may expect from members of the London Symphony Orchestra. If they have an exceptionally good day. Maybe.

Trying to maintain my sanity within an Anglo-Saxon monoculture, I'm now at the Edinburgh International Festival. Last night I attended the most amazing concert by the Budapest Festival Orchestra. The performance of Dvořák's 7th symphony after the interval was phenomenal, but truly unforgettable was the first half, with the Dutch National Youth Choir, consisting of girls many as young as 16. Apart from their ability to sing (by heart) in Czech and Hungarian without floundering once, they had also fully mastered the intricate musical language of songs by Dvořák and Bartók, which were inspired by folk music so far from the triviality of most of Western-European traditional music.

All in all, I witnessed a small miracle yesterday. Culture in the Netherlands has supposedly gone to the dogs as badly as in Britain, and yet a choir of two dozen Dutch girls is able to pull off such a stunt!

A last thought for today: If we are to survive cultural relativism and Islamofascism, we should look to the continent, rather than sucking up to the United Theocracy. (And don't expect President Obama will bring Enlightenment.)

BBC churnalists fall for another marketing stunt

2008-07-02T16:21:00.000-07:00

Spam experiment overloads inboxes (BBC News, Tuesday, 1 July 2008)

The hidden message is: buy McAfee's software or you're screwed.

Surfing the web unprotected will leave the average web user with 70 spam messages each day, according to an experiment by security firm McAfee.

Surfing the web, in the usual sense of visiting web pages, cannot attract spam by itself. If you visit a dodgy web site operated by spammers, they can see your IP address, but they can't find out your email address, unless you tell them. After tracking down more reports on this meaningless experiment, I found that participants were encouraged to do just this.

surf without spam filters

Huh? The person who wrote this may know the meaning of the word "without". Well, one word out of four is not so bad, not for the brilliant, well-informed boys and girls from the technology section of BBC News.

By "websites were installing malware" they may be referring to drive-by downloads, due to the Windows Metafile vulnerability. What is conveniently ignored is that Mac OS and Linux are unaffected by this. Also unaffected are most browsers running on Windows that are slightly less crappy than that pinnacle of crappiness, Internet Explorer. The article does not mention what platform and browser were used in the experiment, perhaps because this would not serve the business interests of McAfee. But one can guess.

Councils warned over spying laws

2008-06-24T14:33:00.000-07:00

Councils warned over spying laws (BBC News, Monday, 23 June 2008)

I don't think councils are abusing their powers, but there have been one or two instances... where it could be said that perhaps some of the offences being investigated were too trivial to be using surveillance techniques.

There were offences even more trivial than those mentioned in the article? What would those be? Saying 'outwith' in place of 'beyond'? Changing a roll of toilet paper with the sheet hanging against the wall? Supporting the French football team?

Don't be fooled by death-penalty supporter David Davis. The Tories don't really give a damn either that Britain has become a surveillance state.

Social survey

2008-06-24T13:56:00.000-07:00

An interviewer from National Statistics called the other day. Whether I could please make an appointment. I told him it was against my principles to cooperate with surveys. Too much information is collected by the authorities as it is, and they're particularly bad at keeping confidential data confidential.

He then asked whether there was anyone else living at the same address whom he could interview. After I refused to answer even this, he left without saying anything more, visibly annoyed that anyone would be less inclined to reveal private information to a total stranger than to their hairdresser.

It will be compulsory to take part in the 2011 census if one would be asked to do so. However, taking part in any other survey is not. Now, why would one take part? For the common good? Giving blood or helping an old lady cross the street is a lot more commendable.

A last thought: One should be wary to have one's house advertise any more information than the house number. For example, one's name can be used by creeps from TVL/BBC. In the past two years I've received dozens of their letters, which I've been throwing away unopened, as my name is not "Legal Occupier".

Public 'need to see justice done'

2008-06-18T03:39:00.000-07:00

Public 'need to see justice done' (BBC News, Wednesday, 18 June 2008)

Criminals' punishment needs to be much more "visible"

Put them in the stocks and pelt them with rotten eggs and tomatoes!

We're all a little tired of hearing about the human rights and civil liberties of people who break the law.

This nutter, appointed by Tony Blair in 2005 "to put respect back into British life", pretty much sums up NuLabour's position on human rights. With socialists like that, who needs fascists.

However, she said she did not want to "see this debate trivialised [...]"

Thank goodness.

PM hits back over civil liberties

2008-06-17T14:17:00.000-07:00

PM hits back over civil liberties (BBC News, Tuesday, 17 June 2008)

Our PM is seriously off his rocker. It is instructive to play the video and hear the doublespeak drivel first-hand.

and the increasing complexity of plots

In other words, it's too complex for us common folk to understand.

networks spanning the globe

It is widely known that al-Qaida operates in networks that are much more decentralised than a few years ago, and it is the absence rather that the presence of global networks that makes regional terror cells so difficult to unravel before they strike. Brown has it backwards here.

people do appreciate the complexity of the issue

Yes, keep stressing "complexity". We are so stupid are we?

changing world

The inalienable human rights we thought we were entitled to belonged to another world, before it changed. Ah well, it was fun while it lasted.

longer pre-detention charge

The fool means "pre-charge detention". Perhaps he originally meant to reduce the detention limit to 24 days, but got that backwards as well.

something which would in the end harm all of our civil liberties

I think Gordon Brown means to say that a successful terrorist attack would harm our civil liberties. So, we should thank him for protecting our civil liberties. I'm glad we have cleared that up.

civil liberties of a person detained

Any detention of an innocent person by definition violates his civil liberties. No "oversight by the judiciary, parliamentary scrutiny, independent review, [...]" can change that. If someone is clearly guilty, let him be charged. Everything else violates fundamental human rights.

'terror' update

2008-06-17T06:06:00.000-07:00

My expectation that the matter would soon be forgotten was proven wrong, although I had to look hard to find this, as it was classified as regional Nottinghamshire news:

Former terror suspect given bail (BBC News, Tuesday, 17 June 2008)

Some of the comments by the 'former terror suspect' are heart-warming. Notwithstanding our government, feelings of solidarity and common decency still exist.

The comments by the other 'former terror suspect' are also informative, at:

Terror vote 'will be very tight' (BBC News, Tuesday, 10 June 2008)

A small victory for human rights:

'Lyrical terrorist' wins appeal (BBC News, Tuesday, 17 June 2008)

Internet meltdown

2008-06-17T04:16:00.000-07:00

Victim of its own success (BBC Today, Tuesday, 17 June 2008)

But one of the world's leading academics on the impact of the net warns we could be facing its destruction.

Remember The Onion had it first: Breaking News: All Online Data Lost After Internet Crash (ONN, July 2007)

Then: Over Logging (South Park, Season 12, Episode 6)

One expert claims the internet is facing meltdown? I know ten experts who claim the BBC News site is filled with alarmist bollocks.

See also: Moore confessions: Internet meltdown (The Guardian, April 15, 2008)

habeas corpus suspended

2008-06-11T16:07:00.000-07:00

Brown wins crunch vote on 42 days (BBC News, Wednesday, 11 June 2008)

It is now official: Britain has become a third-rate banana republic. Apart from the 42 day detention limit itself, the process that led to it, which included horsetrading, bribery, extortion, and plain old lying, should take away any illusion that Britain is still a democracy.

Key points: Terror detention vote (BBC News, Wednesday, 11 June 2008)

1244: Opening the debate Home Secretary Jacqui Smith says it is possible to safeguard civil liberties and rights and to protect people. She tells MPs the threat is more complex and international than ever before as terrorists use technology to cover their tracks.

Do the police now have to solve Rubik's Cube before they are able to tell whether someone has done something bad?

With strong passwords and state-of-the-art cryptosystems with 256-bit keys, all the energy in the universe is insufficient for cryptanalysis. Whether the police is given 42 days or 42 millennia is inconsequential. If code breaking is the argument, why allow any limit on pre-charge detention at all?

The choice of 42 days rather than 41 or 43 is truly bizarre. Did Jacqui Smith derive her sense of reality from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy? I would not be surprised. See also: Their answer is 42. What, exactly, is the question? (The Herald, June 04 2008)

1257: Ms Smith says she and her minister Tony McNulty have been working on proposals for the best part of a year - and denies proposing a permanent, automatic or immediate detention beyond 28 days. She says the bill contains a reserve power only to be used in exceptional circumstances - with strong safeguards and for a temporary period.

If there are no permanent exceptional circumstances, then what is the justification for all the draconian legislation introduced in the last few years by these NuLab gits?

Women demand equal opportunities

2008-06-08T09:29:00.000-07:00

Women demand equal opportunities – to blow themselves to smithereens (The Scotsman, 02 June 2008)

Poignant headers like this are unprofessional, ... and spoil all the fun for us bloggers.

lambs to the slaughter

2008-05-31T09:41:00.000-07:00

Family's shock at council spying (BBC News, Friday, 11 April 2008)

Spy law 'used in dog fouling war' (BBC News, Sunday, 27 April 2008)

Draconian legislation that was presented to us as indispensable in the fight against terrorism and organised crime is now being used to investigate minor offences. How much furore did this spark? Not much. It took The Guardian several weeks to pursue the second story:

Council accused of foul play to catch guilty dog owners (The Guardian, Thursday May 22 2008)

although the issue was parenthetically mentioned in:

Council used terror law to spy on fishermen (The Guardian, Wednesday May 14 2008)

Apparently, even newspapers said to be to the left of the political spectrum are slow to report about the government snooping on us.

It also took much of the British press more than a week to get the facts straight on this shameful matter:

Student was 'studying terrorism' (BBC News, Friday, 23 May 2008)

Student researching al-Qaida tactics held for six days (The Guardian, Saturday May 24, 2008)

Note that the facts were known many days before:

Anger Over "Terror Arrests" at Nottingham University (Indymedia UK, 20.05.2008)

I would not be surprised if this is the last we hear about it from the 'respectable' media. Who cares about two young guys with Islamic sounding names, one of whom is fucking Algerian! The daily gibberish uttered by a warmonger and religious crackpot is much more newsworthy: Blair's faith in difficult task, BBC News 31 May; Blair launches faith foundation, BBC News 30 May; Blair 'to devote life to faith', BBC News 29 May.

Your name is not Rizwaan or Hisham? You're not a student of politics and international relations? You've nothing to hide? Then rest assured your government will fully respect your privacy and not put you in jail for up to 28 (soon 42) days for no reason whatsoever. Sleep tight!

virtual freedom

2008-05-31T06:59:00.000-07:00

Computer generated abuse 'banned' (BBC News, Wednesday, 28 May 2008)

This loophole is real. But the remedy is really perverse (The Guardian, Saturday May 31 2008)

Soon, they may put me in jail for three years for publishing this drawing on the internet:

However, this would be perfectly legal:

Under the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, drawing and distributing this image may also carry a prison sentence of 2 years (virtual zoophile pornography):

Kudos to the brave people who challenge Scientology (and its collaborators among the City of London police), but let us not ignore an even greater threat to freedom and democracy. NuLabour is a dangerous cult that will continue to nibble at the edges of our civil liberties until there is nothing left.