Let's vote!! But who for?

"For the voters next Thursday, here are some of the liberties and rights you've lost or are in the process of losing:

Your communications are no longer private. Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, 500,000 emails and pieces of mail are intercepted every year.

Your home is no longer your castle. A report by the Centre for Policy Studies reveals that the state and its agencies now have 266 powers to enter your home without a warrant. Labour has done more than any other government in the last 50 years to extend these powers. A new act will mean that bailiffs may enter your home to collect traffic penalties and eventually to make good the vast number of fines imposed on those who refuse to bow to the ID card bill.

You may not demonstrate within a kilometre of Parliament Square without first asking a policeman's permission, not even with a blank placard or a quote from George Orwell

Terror legislation means that suspects may be held for up to 28 days without charge. This is punishment without a normal court deciding that the law is broken. Control orders have the same result. Foreign suspects may not instruct their own legal representatives or learn of the evidence against them.

You are about to surrender your privacy forever. The ID card bill will set up databases to record all your important transactions and allow scores of government agencies to monitor your life without your knowledge. Journeys by road are being recorded by ANPR cameras and the information kept for two years.

Defendants' rights are being reduced by the day. Hearsay evidence is allowed in Asbo cases. The proposed serious crime prevention orders will also make hearsay evidence admissible and give courts almost unlimited powers to impose conditions on a person before he or she has been found guilty by normal court proceedings. Trial by jury is suspended when there is a risk of jury-tampering or in complicated fraud cases where the jury is held to be too stupid to decide whether someone is telling the truth. The Carter reforms on legal aid result in pressure to plead guilty.......

Labour has introduced some 3,000 new offences. Under the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act, if arrested, you are now required to be photographed and provide a DNA sample and fingerprints. These are kept by the state regardless of whether charges are brought or not."

Henry Porter, The Observer, 29.4.07
Here, and see comments too

There is also a bill going through which will allow MPs to keep their expenses and correspondence with ministries secret. This from a government who brought the freedom of information act into being.

It's unlikely the Tories will be any better. It's not too late to do something about this, but it soon will be.
We are heading for a police state.

More..... tosh?

As Britain's outspoken Ambassador to the Central Asian Republic of Uzbekistan, Craig Murray helped expose vicious human rights abuses by the US-funded regime of Islam Karimov. He is now a prominent critic of Western policy in the region. Here are two excerpts from his blog.

March 26, 2007, Lying About The Dead

An extraordinary story appeared once this morning on BBC News 24, and then was buried.

The BBC World Service has obtained a document. It is an official appraisal by British government scientists across government departments, commissioned by 10 Downing Street, of the study published by the Lancet that estimated 655,000 dead in Iraq.

The appraisal says that the methodology is correct and that the study "follows best practice".

Astonishingly, the official DFID verdict was that 655,000 dead is "If anything, an underestimate".

Yet the Government poured scorn on the Lancet study, despite having commissioned a report from their own scientists that said it was good.

Who can doubt that if the government scientists had rubbished the study, the number ten spin machine would have publicised that like crazy?

Doubtless the Official Secrets Act will be wheeled out to try and sit on the government scientists' report, which the BBC already seems to have reburied, showing its typical craven attitude towards the Blair government.

Personally, I did not know how much credence to give the study published in the Lancet, not being technically equipped to evaluate it.

We can now be confident that the death toll in Iraq was over 600,000 a year ago, and probably over 700,000 now.

There is much talk of Blair's legacy. In fact he has two major legacies. 700,000 rotting corpses, and the culture of lies that sought to suppress the truth about it.

December 15, 2006 The War on Shampoo

Google "Rashid Rauf - mastermind". On the first page of results you will find CBS, the BBC, the Times, Guardian and Mail all describing Rauf last summer, on security service or police briefing, as the "Mastermind" behind the "Liquid terror bomb plot".

So the fact that a Pakistani court has found there is no evidence of terrorism against him cannot be lightly dismissed by the cheerleaders of the plot story.

Rashid Rauf still faces other charges, including forgery, and what is touted as possession of explosives, although what he actually possessed was hydrogen peroxide, which is not explosive.

As hydrogen peroxide is readily obtainable without limitation from any chemist or hardware store in the UK, why you would source it in Pakistan to blow up jets in Britain was never very convincing. The Pakistani court perhaps felt so too.

Rashid Rauf has much to answer. He is still wanted in the UK over the murder of his uncle some years ago - a crime which, like the alleged forgery, had no apparent terrorist link.

None of which adds to the credibility of the evidence he allegedly gave the Pakistani intelligence services about the liquid bomb plot in the UK.

A second and simultaneous development is even more compelling evidence that this massive scare was, as I said at the time, "More propaganda than plot".

Thames Valley police have given up after five months scouring the woods near High Wycombe where the bomb materials were allegedly hidden.

They told the Home Office on 12 December that they would only continue if the government were prepared to meet the costs; they wished to get back to devoting their resources to real crimes, like armed robbery and burglary.

Remember this was a plot described by the authorities as "Mass murder on an unimaginable scale" and "Bigger than 9/11". There have been instances in the UK of hundreds of police officers deployed for years to find an individual murderer.

If the police really believed they were dealing with an effort at "Mass murder on an unimaginable scale", would they be calling off the search after five months? No.

Which brings us to the lies that have been told - one of which concerns this search. An anonymous police source tipped off the media early on that they had discovered a "Suitcase" containing "bomb-making materials".

This has recently been described to me by a security service source as "A lot of rubbish from someone's garage dumped in the woods".

You could indeed cannibalise bits of old wire, clocks and car parts to form part of a bomb - perhaps you could enclose it in the old suitcase.

But have they found stuff that is exclusively concerned with causing explosions, like detonators, explosives or those famous liquid chemicals? No, they haven't found any.

Wycombe Woods, like the sands of Iraq, have failed to yield up the advertised WMD.

The other "evidence" that the police announced they had found consisted of wills (with the implication they were made by suicide bombers) and a map of Afghanistan.

It turns out that the wills were made in the early 90s by volunteers going off to fight the Serbs in Bosnia - they had been left with the now deceased uncle of one of those arrested.

The map of Afghanistan had been copied out by an eleven year old boy. All of which is well known to the UK media, but none of which has been reported for fear of prejudicing the trial.

I am at a complete loss to understand why it does not prejudice the trial for police to announce in a blaze of worldwide front page publicity that they have found bomb-making materials, wills and maps. Only if you contradict the police is that prejudicial. Can anyone explain why?

While the arrest of 26 people in connection with the plot was also massively publicised, the gradual release of many of them has again gone virtually unreported. For example on 31 October a judge released two brothers from Chingford commenting that the police had produced no credible evidence against them.

Charges against others have been downgraded, so that those now accused of plotting to commit explosions are less than the ten planes the police claimed they planned to blow up in suicide attacks.

Five British newspapers had to pay damages to a Birmingham man they accused, on security service briefing, of being part of the plot. Only the Guardian had the grace to publish the fact and print a retraction.

A final fact to ponder. Despite naming him as the "mastermind" behind somethng "bigger than 9/11", the British government made no attempt to extradite Rashid Rauf on charges of terrorism.

That is not difficult to do - the Pakistani authorities have handed over scores of terrorist suspects to the US, many into the extraordinary rendition process, and on average the procedure is astonishingly quick - less than a week and they are out of the country.

But the British security services, who placed so much weight on intelligence from Rashid Rauf, were extraordinarily coy about getting him here where his evidence could be properly scrutinised by a British court.

However MI5 were greatly embarassed by Birmingham police, who insisted on pointing out that Rauf was wanted in the UK over the alleged murder of his uncle in Birmingham.

Now he was in custody in Pakistan, shouldn't we extradite him? So eventually an extradition request over that murder was formally submitted - but not pursued with real energy or effort. There remains no sign that we will see Rauf in the UK.

I still do not rule out that there was a germ of a terror plot at the heart of this investigation. We can speculate about agents provocateurs and security service penetration, both British and Pakistani, but still there might have been genuine terrorists involved.

But the incredible disruption to the travelling public, the War on Shampoo, and the "Bigger than 9/11" hype is unravelling.

You won't read that in the newspapers.

Read more at www.craigmurray.co.uk
These are extracts from Craig Murray's blog. The opinions expressed are those of the author.


Me here. And where was the above printed, you ask (apart from Craig Murray's blog that is)? That reputable organ, the Daily Mail...

How to be unbiased. Fox show you how

BBC has not come to this yet