There is more than a whiff of nostalgia surrounding the reporting of this week's tribunal ruling over Poole Council's unlawful surveillance operation on mother-of-three, Jenny Paton and her family.

The actual surveillance operation to establish whether the Paton family lived within their school's catchment area took place more than two years ago and only lasted three weeks. When the story first came to light in June 2008 even the then home secretary, Jacqui Smith, was prepared to acknowledge that this was an inappropriate use of surveillance powers supposed to be reserved for serious crime and counter-terrorism work.

Indeed, this week's rather academic ruling from the Investigatory Powers Tribunal that Poole council's use of these powers was improper and unnecessary tells us more about that tribunal than it does about current day methods to enforce schools admission policies. It has taken two and half years for this tribunal to issue a commonsense ruling that spying on a family home, trailing the Paton's young daughters and recording the family's movements shouldn't be the business of council officials. The most remarkable thing about the case is that this is the first in which this shadowy tribunal held a public hearing to consider a substantive case. The IPT was set up as part of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. It wasn't until 2003 that it was established that it could hold hearings to determine legal issues in public. The tribunal deals with complaints not only about surveillance but also over interception of communications – phone tapping in ordinary parlance. The tribunal has been in business for more than eight years and is supposed to hold not only local authorities but the police and security services to account. Yet this is only the fourth time that it has upheld a complaint.

When the House of Lords constitution committee looked at the growth of the "surveillance state" it heard criticism of the tribunal. Assistant chief constable, Nick Gargan, the Association of Chief Police Officers lead on surveillance, described the tribunal as a missed opportunity. He said so few people knew about it that it was hardly a visible means of redress for those who felt they had been wrongly treated. Others feel the tribunal is fundamentally flawed or inherently unjust. So far its website gives details of only five decisions in the last eight years. As the home secretary, Theresa May, ponders a new Ripa regime with her promised review of surveillance powers perhaps she could overhaul the workings of this obscure tribunal at the same time.

    This coming from the Tories when Tory toff Boris Johnson is trying to kick the Democracy village protesters out of Parliament Square.

    A bonfire of draconian anti-terror laws was promised by Theresa May yesterday to reverse the 'substantial erosion of civil liberties' by Labour ministers. The Home Secretary said powers that could be scrapped or scaled back include 28- day detention without charge, control orders, stop and search and Big Brother snooping by town halls. She also pledged a sweeping review of laws that allow the arrest of people who take pictures of police officers or hold peaceful protests without permission outside Parliament.

    There will be a new drive to kick out foreign terror suspects who use the Human Rights Act to frustrate the deportation process, and an investigation into allowing intercept evidence in court. Lord Macdonald, the former director of public prosecutions and an outspoken critic of the last government's legislative record, will lead the review. In a statement to MPs, Mrs May said she wanted to correct 'mistakes' made by Labour, which was allowed to 'ride roughshod' over Britain's hard-won freedoms. She added: 'National security is the first duty of government but we are also committed to reversing the substantial erosion of civil liberties. 'I want a counter-terrorism regime that is proportionate, focused and transparent. We must ensure that in protecting public safety, the powers which we need to deal with terrorism are in keeping with Britain's traditions of freedom and fairness.' The review was a key plank of the coalition agreement published after the Government was formed in May.

    It has already promised a Freedom Bill and introduced legislation to scrap ID cards. But the most controversial aspect of the review is likely to be 28-day detention of terror suspects without charge. This could now be returned to a fortnight. However, Labour is certain to claim officers are being denied a vital power while the threat of a terror attack remains extremely high. Scotland Yard boss Sir Paul Stephenson said it should not be revamped, adding: 'It would be a huge mistake to go back and talk about the number of days. We must not get sidetracked on the number of days, rather than dealing with the issues and consequences.' Pending the review, the 28-day limit will stand for six months.

    Ministers will also face challenges in scrapping control orders, which allow the house arrest of terror suspects who cannot be deported or jailed. There will be a drive to secure agreements to deport foreign suspects placed under the orders by reaching deals with their homelands that they will not be ill-treated. This would stop courts blocking their removal on human rights grounds. But, for British fanatics, the alternative is hugely expensive 24-hour surveillance. The review should also lead to the dismantling of Labour's most controversial laws.

    The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, used by town halls to spy on dog foulers and people suspected of cheating school catchment area rules, is likely to be scaled back. Councils will have to seek permission from a magistrate to use it, and only for serious crimes. The stop and search of people without reasonable suspicion, which is already under an interim ban, is likely to be ditched.

    The right to protest close to the House of Commons without prior police permission -restricted by the last government, is likely to be restored. Shadow home secretary Alan Johnson condemned Mrs May's statement as an 'immature and partisan attack' on Labour's record. He said many of the measures under review were supported by all parties following the 'horror and carnage' of the 7/7 attacks on London in 2005. He warned that the 'threat faced then has not diminished'. Labour claims the coalition is making life easier for terrorists.

    But civil liberties groups say that by imposing severe restrictions on the rights and freedoms of British citizens, the last government was itself handing a victory to the extremists. Shami Chakrabarti, of Liberty, said: 'This is a once-in-ageneration opportunity to reform counter-terror measures and bring them within the rule of law.'

  • Spies Like Us : Scottish Govt say ‘No plans to review Council snooping powers in Scotland’

    Credit agencies lined up to pinpoint benefit cheats Use of private financial data attacked as a 'recipe for snooping'

    Efforts to cut benefit fraud will be bolstered by using data analysis techniques borrowed from the private sector Credit agencies have been called in by ministers hunting for massive savings in government spending to help slash Britain's £3bn benefit fraud bill. A nationwide clampdown on bogus housing benefit claims will be launched this year using techniques borrowed from the private sector for assessing creditworthiness. A similar drive against fraudulent claims for incapacity benefit is expected to follow. The companies will compare information about private household spending – such as utility bills, mobile phone payment details and satellite television subscriptions – against benefit records to identify potential fraudsters. Civil liberties groups last night raised concerns over potential breaches of personal privacy, while the use of the technique threatens to embarrass Nick Clegg's promises on behalf of the coalition government to roll back state intrusion in individuals' lives. It also raises concerns that innocent people could be unnecessarily investigated on the back of faulty or out-of-date financial information.

    The information services company Experian has conducted tests on reducing housing benefit fraud in nine areas which it said saved the taxpayer up to £17m. It looked for "unusual patterns of spending" in households receiving the benefit which could suggest the claimants had other sources of income not being declared to town halls which administer payments. The firm also attempted to identify claimants who have an undeclared partner who is at work by examining electoral registers and highlighting shared bank accounts. The initiative on housing benefit, set up by the previous government, is to be rolled out across the country by the end of the year by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) headed by Iain Duncan Smith. Experian said it did not use the technique to identify fraudsters, but to flag up to local councils those addresses where it believed there was "potential for fraud" and merited further investigation. With the housing benefit bill running at nearly £20bn, the Chancellor George Osborne last week announced moves to shave £1.7bn a year off the costs by 2014-15. Experian is also negotiating with the DWP over ways of clamping down on fraudulent claims of incapacity benefit, claiming to be able to achieve savings of £300m. Again using information about consumer spending, it would attempt to pinpoint households who appeared to be living beyond the means of a benefit claimant, such as building up large lines of credit.

    The company said that the change of government in May had led to a "sharp gear change" in the DWP's focus on combating fraud. Andrew Davis, head of fraud for Experian Public Sector, said: "We are picking up increased activity in all areas of government. They are really, really trying to find savings, using whatever tools and techniques are out there." The firm said it operated within strict data protection rules stipulating private information could only be shared with public bodies to detect fraud. However, the use of credit agencies by the public sector was condemned last night by the pressure group Big Brother Watch. Alex Deane, its director, said: "Nobody approves of benefit cheats. But mining private data on a routine basis on the off-chance of catching people out is a disproportionate invasion of privacy. Credit agencies should think carefully about effectively becoming enforcers for the state, compromising private information about people."

    Phil Booth, national co-ordinator of NOID, which campaigns against the "database state", denounced the use of credit agencies as a "recipe for snooping". "This is a very significant blanket intrusion into private financial information," he added. The DWP confirmed it was examining ways of increasing the use of credit agencies. "The department recognises the valuable role credit reference agencies play in countering fraud and is exploring how private sector prevention and detection practices could be used to further tackle fraud in the benefit system and save the taxpayer money," said a spokeswoman. However, its use could cause alarm among Liberal Democrat MPs anxious over the political direction of the coalition administration. Mr Clegg has promised that the new government will "stand up against illegitimate advances of the state". Last night Liberal Democrat MPs said they wanted to see how the use of credit agencies turned out in practice. One senior party figure said: "I would be very concerned if the credit agencies are acting aggressively. We need to be sure that they are behaving in accordance with the relevant codes of conduct." Case study: Held at gunpoint over a case of mistaken identity

    John Irving, 55, a management consultant from Norwich, he was confused for a criminal wanted for extradition by the US. "I was unfortunate enough to share the same name as a chap wanted for extradition by the Americans for his involvement with the oil-for-food programme in Iraq – he has subsequently admitted it in a plea bargain. The whole thing was perpetrated by a couple of financial institutions who created a false record on the Experian database – a bank and a credit card company. "The problem was that this bloke and I shared a name and we both had accounts there. Some lowly clerk had created a financial association between the two of us – I was completely innocent of that. "When I tried to go to America on a family holiday in August 2004 I was detained. We were going through immigration and border control in a very quiet part of Canada and it was all very pleasant until the border control system went into meltdown.

    "I hadn't a clue what it was all about. It was very unpleasant. I'd never met this bloke at all and had no dealings with him. But for a couple of hours my wife and I were detained at gunpoint. "We got away from the police and the CIA and sorted that side of it but that was the least of our concerns. The difficulty has been in disassociating my wife and I from this guy. "My credit reference went into meltdown. Experian were also an innocent party but these companies have a duty of care to ensure that the information they maintain is as accurate as possible. It is also a statutory duty under the Data Protection Act. "They have so much information flying through their system – they can run validation checks on some of it, but not on all of it. This happens two or three times a year – they regard it as a business risk. "It's been a financial nightmare. I wasn't fazed by dealing by lawyers, barristers, policemen and the FBI. But if other people in the same situation didn't have access to the resources I did, they could crumble."

    Credit reference companies: What they do

    * Business has boomed for credit reference agencies as Britain has increasingly swapped cash for plastic. Companies such as Experian hold information from the electoral roll about where, and with whom, people live and how long they have been at that address. They have details of loans, as well as defaults on loans, repossessions and bankruptcies. It all adds up to a personal "credit rating" which lenders refer to when they are deliberating whether to issue a credit card, lend money or offer a mortgage deal.

    * They can also build up a detailed picture of individuals' spending patterns. They know, for example, if a household has a satellite TV subscription or has accumulated heavy credit card debts.

    * Experian has also developed a system its calls "mosaic" for characterising social groups, such as "young well-educated city dwellers" and "residents of isolated rural communities". The way they vote can be analysed by Experian. So can their propensity to commit benefit fraud: "lower income workers [living] in urban terraces" are considered most likely to fiddle the system.

    * Experian is now a global credit information group, with operations in 36 countries.

    * Experian allows consumers to check their own credit reports to see if they are likely to be refused credit cards or loans. However there have been accusations that an individual's credit rating can in some cases be inaccurate and affected by things outside their control.


    The Met is set to begin tracking every officer using the GPS chips in their radios, in a £2 million scheme to send emergency back-up more quickly.

    The system will allow every officer to be tracked when their radio is switched on. The whereabouts of police on foot will be seen on screens that are used now to track vehicles. Other officers who are nearby and able to respond should be quickly pinpointed. However, there are fears the system may be too slow. Pete Smyth, of the Metropolitan Police Federation, said: “If it is updating every 15 minutes, as it was in some of the trials, then an officer can be a mile away.”

    julian assange WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange has given his strongest indication yet about the next big leak from his whistleblower organisation.

    There has been rampant speculation about WikiLeaks' next revelation following its recent release of a top secret military video showing an attack in Baghdad which killed more than a dozen people, including two employees of the Reuters news agency. Bradley Manning, a US military intelligence officer based in Iraq, has been arrested on suspicion of leaking the video but it is also claimed that Manning bragged online that he had handed WikiLeaks 260,000 secret US State Department cables. In an interview with the ABC's Foreign Correspondent, Mr Assange said cryptically of WikiLeaks' current project:

    "I can give an analogy. If there had been mass spying that had affected many, many people and organisations and the details of that mass spying were released then that is something that would reveal that the interests of many people had been abused." He agreed it would be of the "calibre" of publishing information about the way the top secret Echelon system - the US-UK electronic spying network which eavesdrops on worldwide communications traffic - had been used. Mr Assange also confirmed that WikiLeaks has a copy of a video showing a US military bombing of a western Afghan township which killed dozens of people, including children.

    He noted, though, it was a very intricate case "substantially more complex" than the Iraq material WikiLeaks had released - referring to the gunship video. European news media are reporting that Mr Assange has "surfaced from almost a month in hiding", speaking at a freedom of information seminar at the European parliament in Brussels. But during the course of the past month, Mr Assange has been talking to Foreign Correspondent for a program examining the efficacy of the WikiLeaks model. "What we want to create is a system where there is guaranteed free press across the world, the entire world, that every individual in the world has the ability to publish materials that is meaningful," he said.

    Whistleblower speaks

    The program has also spoken directly to former computer hacker Adrian Lamo who blew the whistle on Bradley Manning after a boastful online discussion in which Lamo alleges the military intelligence adviser revealed himself as a significant WikiLeaks source. "He proceeded to identify himself as an intelligence analyst and pose the question: What would you do if you have unprecedented access to classified data 14 hours a day seven days a week?" Mr Lamo said. "He (Manning) was firing bullets into the air without thought to consequence of where they might land or who they might hit."

    WikiLeaks has built an information repository it thinks is foolproof. Instead of secret documents physically changing hands, they are anonymously sent to digital drop boxes and stored on servers around the world. Finally, they are posted on the WikiLeaks site. During Foreign Correspondent's assignment Mr Assange had been preparing to fly to New York to meet his hero - Daniel Ellsberg - the former US military analyst who leaked the Pentagon Papers which amounted to a devastating expose of the Vietnam War. Instead, concerned about travelling in the US and attracting the interest of authorities, he used Skype to speak to the conference.

    He told the crowd: "Leaking is inherently an anti-authoritarian act. It's inherently an anarchist act." Mr Assange has been quoted as saying he feels perfectly safe in Europe, "but I have been advised by my lawyers not to travel to the US during this period". Daniel Ellsberg, named by Henry Kissinger as "the most dangerous man in America", told Foreign Correspondent that Mr Assange was "a good candidate for being the most dangerous man in the world, in the eyes of people like the one who gave me that award". "I'm sure that Assange is now regarded as one of the very most dangerous men and he should be quite proud of that."


    Putting bags over cameras linked to counter terrorism in parts of Birmingham has been described as "farcical" by a privacy campaign group. Big Brother Watch described the 218 cameras, put up in predominantly Muslim areas, as "excessive surveillance".

    The Safer Birmingham Partnership (SBP) said it would not switch the cameras on until after a public consultation. Plastic bags are being put over some of the overt cameras to reassure the public. A number of the cameras installed are hidden. The SBP said bags would not be placed over these because it did not want their locations revealed. Dylan Sharpe, campaign director of Big Brother Watch, a group set up by the founders of the Taxpayers' Alliance, said: "Without a doubt I think some of these (cameras) should be removed.

    "It is a farcical situation sticking plastic bags over them."

    Counter-terrorism fund

    The cameras have mainly been installed in Sparkbrook and Washwood Heath under a scheme called Project Champion. They were financed through a counter-terrorism fund, but the SBP has said they would be used to tackle all crime.

    "Big Brother Watch is fighting for every community to get this sort of consultation on whether they want cameras or not." says Dylan Sharpe Big Brother Watch

    Speaking about the consultation, Mr Sharpe said: "My main hope is that it brings this issue of CCTV back into the mainstream and forces people in local, central government and police to justify spending this amount of money on CCTV. "Big Brother Watch is fighting for every community to get this sort of consultation on whether they want cameras or not." Hall Green MP Roger Godsiff, who raised the issue with the Safer Birmingham Partnership at a meeting earlier, said he felt local people should decide whether the cameras stay or not.

    Corinna Ferguson, legal officer at human rights group Liberty, said: "Belated consultation of the communities targeted by Project Champion will give local people a much-needed platform to voice their absolute rejection of this discriminatory scheme." She said the group was planning legal action on the use of the cameras. "Although Project Champion has stalled to allow full public consultation to be carried out, Liberty intends to pursue a legal challenge to this ill-conceived and discriminatory initiative to ensure that the rights of residents are properly protected," she added. A Home Office spokesman said the government was already looking at CCTV and ANPR (automatic number plate recognition) regulations, adding that Project Champion was started under the previous administration.

    julian assange Wikileaks' founder Julian Assange has pioneered the use of information mainstream media are unable to publish.

    It has the ingredients of a spy thriller: an American military analyst turned whistleblower; 260,000 classified government documents; and rumours that the world's most powerful country is hunting a former hacker whom it believes is about to publish them. Pentagon and State Department officials are desperately trying to discover whether Bradley Manning, a US army intelligence officer currently under arrest in Kuwait, has leaked highly sensitive embassy cables to, an online community of some 800 volunteer cyber experts, activists, journalists and lawyers which has become a thorn in the side of governments and corrupt corporations across the globe. Reports in the US say officials are seeking to apprehend Julian Assange, the website's founder who has pioneered the release of the kind of information the mainstream media are either unwilling or unable to publish.

    Manning, 22, an intelligence analyst from Potomac, Maryland, who had been serving in Iraq, was revealed earlier this week as the source behind a highly damning leak earlier in the year that showed harrowing cockpit footage of an American Apache helicopter gunning down unarmed civilians in Baghdad three years ago. But the Apache video may have proven to be one leak too far. Adrian Lamo, a former US hacker turned journalist who had been conversing with Manning online and later gave up his name to the authorities, said he also claimed to have handed 260,000 classified US embassy messages to Wikileaks. According to Mr Lamo, Manning said the documents showed "almost-criminal political back dealings" made by US embassies in the Middle East which, if true, would cause enormous embarrassment to key allies in a notoriously volatile area of the world. Mr Lamo claims Manning said that "Hillary Clinton and several thousand diplomats around the world are going to have a heart attack when they wake up one morning, and find an entire repository of classified foreign policy is available, in searchable format, to the public".

    If those responsible for the site wanted any confirmation that the US military have them in their sights, they only need to look at their own website. In March this year Wikileaks published a leaked 32-page intelligence report which described the site as a "threat to the US Army". The report added: "The possibility that current employees or moles within [the Department of Defence] or elsewhere in the US government are providing sensitive or classified information to cannot be ruled out." The site has previously shown that it is prepared to publish sensitive documents from US embassies. In January Wikileaks posted a classified cable from the US embassy in Reykjavik which described a meeting between embassy chief Sam Watson, the British Ambassador, Ian Whiting, and members of the Icelandic government. In an interview with the BBC news website – the only one he has given since Manning was arrested – Mr Assange refused to confirm whether the intelligence analyst was the source of the Apache video. He also said he had no knowledge of the 260,000 further files that Manning claimed to have leaked.

    But while Mr Assange may be shunning media interviews, he seems to be making no attempt to keep a low profile. Yesterday afternoon, the site's Twitter page announced that Mr Assange would be appearing in Las Vegas later in the day for a panel discussion about protecting anonymous sources – appearing alongside former CIA agent Valerie Plame and Leonard Downie Jr, a former editor of the Washington Post who supervised much of the paper's coverage of the Watergate scandal. An earlier tweet suggested Wikileaks would not look kindly upon any US government interference. "Any signs of unacceptable behaviour by the Pentagon or its agents towards this press will be viewed dimly," the post said.

    Website that breaks news

    *Although Wikileaks is nominally hosted in Sweden, it fiercely protects both itself and the identity of its sources by routing all leaks through a series of servers around the world, which makes them virtually impossible to trace or shut down. "It's a very effective measure to mask who a whistleblower is and where they are connecting from," says Rik Fergusson, a cyber security expert at Trend Micro. "The only way to track it is in real time, which is almost impossible."

    *Founded in 2006 by Australian-born former hacker Julian Assange, it has no paid staff and relies on volunteers and donations.

    *In the past four years the site has released, among other items, the British National Party's membership list, detailed US military procedures for handling prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Sarah Palin's emails, the University of East Anglia's "Climategate emails" and 570,000 pager messages intercepted after the 11 September terrorist attacks.

    *Wikileaks claims its next big scoop will be to publish video footage of an air strike in Afghanistan that killed scores of civilians.

    Home Secretary Theresa May has moved to scrap the controversial £5 billion national identity card scheme, declaring it "intrusive, bullying and ineffective".

    Declaring herself "very pleased" to be wielding the axe to ID cards, she claimed the move that would lead to a "Millennium Dome's" worth of savings - or nearly £900 million for the taxpayer. She claimed the cards were "un-British" and represented "the worst of Government".

    The Government was sending a signal of its intention to conduct business differently, as the servants of the public and not their masters, she told MPs. Ms May was speaking during second reading debate of the Identity Documents Bill, which will invalidate all existing cards within one month of the Bill becoming law. It will also destroy all information held on the National Identity Register, effectively dismantling it. The role of the Identity Commissioner, created in an effort to prevent data blunders and leaks, will be terminated. Around 15,000 members of the public who had paid £30 for one of the cards would not be compensated, Ms May stressed. Speaking as the first piece of legislation was debated in the Commons, Ms May said: "The national identity card scheme represents the worst of Government. It is intrusive and bullying, ineffective and expensive. It is an assault on individual liberty that does not promise a greater good. The Bill is therefore partly symbolic, it sends a message that the Government is going to do business in a different way. We are the servants of the people and not their masters."

    She added: "We have no hesitation in making the national identity card scheme an unfortunate footnote in history. There it should remain, a less happy time when the government allowed hubris to trump civil liberties." Shadow home secretary Alan Johnson said Labour would not vote against the Bill, as he accepted the mandate of the Government to abolish them, but he pointed out the "inconsistency" of the Tory position, as they had backed ID cards up to and through the 2005 general election.

    Axis communications, a Swedish corporation, was contracted in 2003 by the city of Chicago to install the most extensive video surveillance network in the United States, setting up thousands of cameras around 'problem areas' on street corners.

    Since 2003 approximately 15,000 cameras have been integrated into the system, recording video onto computers and implementing a cybernetic approach to control; indexable data collected by the cameras may be immediately accessed whenever police deem it necessary.

    An omnipresent potential surveillance, these 217 million dollars' worth of cameras represent an offensive by power against public space, in which one must now expect to be seen and monitored.

    As the authoritarian commodity of security and the implementation of cybernetic surveillance systems expand, spontaneous interaction, community, and autonomy contract, conditioned by the knowledge that everything you do - not only when in the presence of police, but when in public space - may be used against you.

    The £5 billion national identity card scheme will be consigned to the scrapheap as a result of the new coalition Government, the Home Office confirmed

    Axing the controversial scheme and associated identity databases were key manifesto commitments for both the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. Senior ministers must now choose how to withdraw several thousand cards already in circulation after individuals paid £30 and handed over personal information. The majority have been handed to foreign nationals, but people in the north-west England, young people in London and airport workers were also able to apply.

    Anyone holding a card can still use it for identification, banking and travel within Europe. A message posted on the Identity and Passport Service website today urged anyone considering an application to wait for further announcements. It said: "Both parties that now form the new Government stated in their manifestos that they will cancel identity cards and the National Identity Register. We will announce in due course how this will be achieved. "Applications can continue to be made for ID cards but we would advise anyone thinking of applying to wait for further announcements.

    "Until Parliament agrees otherwise, identity cards remain valid and as such can still be used as an identity document and for travel within Europe. "We will update you with further information as soon as we have it."

    arizonaspeed Officials decline to renew the contract for the highly unpopular program that was used to ticket motorists going more than 10 mph over the limit.

    Arizona's controversial — and widely despised — highway speed cameras are coming down. The state's Department of Public Safety sent a letter to the cameras' operating company this week, stating that its 2-year contract would not be renewed. The agreement ends July 15, and the cameras will be turned off the next day.

    The cameras, paired with radar devices, photograph vehicles exceeding the speed limit by 11 mph or more on state highways. A notice of violation — with a fine of $181.50 — was then sent to the address of the vehicle's registered owner. Motorists and lawmakers protested that the cameras were impractical in a state where people are accustomed to driving long, lonely stretches of road at high speeds. Citizens covered camera lenses with Silly String or Post-it sticky notes. Pressure had been mounting in the Legislature to end the program, and Republican Gov. Jan Brewer had denounced it.

    A spokeswoman for Redflex, which has camera contracts in more than 240 U.S. cities, said the company was "undoubtedly disappointed" in the decision. The matter isn't related to the company's performance or services, spokeswoman Shoba Vaitheeswaran wrote in an e-mail. Lt. Jeff King, who oversees the program, said that the decision was a policy matter within the Department of Public Safety, but that he could not comment further. Shawn Dow, chairman of a group supporting a November ballot initiative to ban photo enforcement statewide, said the decision wasn't surprising. "We've seen this coming," Dow said. "We were just waiting for the formal letter to be sent."

    John Keegan, a judge for the Arrowhead Justice Court, had called the cameras unconstitutional and dismissed more than 8,500 photo-enforcement tickets. Keegan said Thursday that the program was never done correctly. The decision, he said, will relieve a "tremendous logjam" in the court system of motorists appealing their citations.


    THE war on motorists is being taken up a gear with “spy-in-the-sky” speed cameras that use satellites to track drivers for miles. Makers of the system have told ministers the technology is so cheap and highly advanced that just one control centre can operate up to 1,000 cameras.

    But campaigners said it was yet another assault on persecuted motorists, who have paid out a staggering £1billion in speeding fines under Labour. They say the public is being hit by a “double whammy” – a cynical bid to generate revenue under the guise of road safety and the introduction of a “Big Brother” surveillance system by stealth.

    Known as SpeedSpike, the system combines number plate recognition with global positioning satellite equipment. It can track drivers over several miles and calculate their average speed over as little as 100 yards. Images of vehicles are captured as part of the enforcement action. Billions of images of innocent drivers are already being routinely recorded and stored by police for two years. Big Brother Watch campaign director Dylan Sharpe said: “Britain is already the most watched country in the world. “Now we are confronted by this new network of camera surveillance. It is intrusive and com­pletely over-the-top.” Brian MacDowall, of the Association of British Drivers, said: “These devices are sold on the basis they will make money.” The cameras are an enhanced version of those used at roadworks or to enforce the London Congestion Charge. They are already being tested by the Home Office at Southwark, in London, and on the A374 in Cornwall.

    Details of the trials emerged in a report by the House of Commons Transport Committee. The cameras have been developed by PIPS Technology, a US-owned firm with a base in Hampshire. PIPS told the committee the cameras could be used for “congestion reduction, speed enforcement” or to “eliminate rat-runs”. Meanwhile, the first council to ban speed cameras has seen driver prosecutions fall – and no rise in the number of accidents.

    Figures show speeding fines fell from 3,681 to 2,120 in the six months after Tory-run Swindon Borough Council switched off its Gatso cameras last summer. A total of nine accidents happened where the cameras operated – the same as the previous year. The fall in prosecutions has cost the Government £80,000. Council leader Roderick Bluh said: “Cameras are more about fund raising than road safety and these figures prove that.”


    blake robbins Lower Merion School District sued for cyber spying on students

    Lower Merion School District officials brag that they give every one of their 1,800 high-schoolers laptop computers to "ensure that all students have 24/7 access to school-based resources." Instead, they ensured they got a 24/7 sneak peek into students’ private lives by secretly monitoring webcams embedded in the laptops to spy on teens and their families at home, according to a federal, class-action lawsuit filed this week in Philadelphia.

    The suit alleges the remotely controlled covert cameras violate everything from the Fourth Amendment to wiretapping, electronic communications and computer fraud laws. It was filed Tuesday on behalf of Harriton High student Blake J. Robbins and all Lower Merion students by Robbins' parents Michael and Holly Robbins of Penn Valley. Named as defendants are the school district, the district's nine-member Board of Directors and Superintendent Christopher W. McGinley. The Robbins seek unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, as well as an end to the "spying," according to the 17-page complaint. The family first learned of the embedded webcams on Nov. 11, when Harriton High's Assistant Principal Lindy Matsko reprimanded Blake Robbins for "improper behavior in his home," according to the lawsuit. Matsko cited as evidence a photograph from the webcam on the boy's school-issued laptop. The lawsuit does not specify why the photograph was objectionable.

    Because the webcam can capture anything happening in the room where the laptop is, district personnel could illicitly observe plenty more than a student's online activity, the lawsuit alleges. "Many of the images captured and intercepted may consist of images of minors and their parents or friends in compromising or embarrassing positions, including, but not limited to, in various stages of dress or undress," the lawsuit charges. The Robbins' attorney, Mark Haltzman, couldn't be reached this morning. McGinley and District Spokesman Doug Young did not immediately return telephone calls for comment today.

  • School snared 1,000s of webcam images of students via illicit laptop spying
  • High School Student's Privacy Invaded By Vice Principal

    BT could face criminal case over Phorm trials

    The Crown Prosecution Service has revealed that it is working with a top barrister on a potential criminal case against BT over its secret trials of Phorm's targeted advertising system. Almost two years to the day since we revealed BT had covertly intercepted and profiled the web browsing habits of tens of thousands of its customers, the CPS told campaigners this week that it is still investigating the affair.

    "The Crown Prosecution Service is working hard to review the evidence in this legally and factually complex matter," a spokeswoman said. "We have requested and received technical and expert evidence, some of which we have only recently received, and which is being very carefully considered." The final decision on whether to prosecute will rest with Keir Starmer, the director of public prosecutions.

    The CPS' investigation was triggered in October 2008, when the campaign website directly contacted the CPS, after City of London Police refused to investigate. Campaigners gave prosecutors a file of evidence, including a copy of BT's detailed internal report on a trial of Phorm's technology in 2006, obtained by The Register. The experiment monitored 18,000 broadband lines without customers' knowledge or consent. This week the CPS said: "We are currently awaiting advice from a senior barrister which we will review before coming to a conclusion. We are giving the matter meticulous attention and will reach a proper and considered decision as soon as it is possible for us to do so."

    The main law BT is alleged to have broken is the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA). It restricts the interception of communications. After the trials, BT and Phorm sought advice from the Home Office over whether their planned national deployment would be legal under RIPA. Officials gave the opinion - since disputed - that it would be if customers gave consent.

    BT declined to make any comment today.

    Although the CPS is politically independent, a criminal prosecution may be viewed as a useful move in Whitehall. The European Commission is currently considering taking the government to court in Luxembourg over UK authorities' failure to take any action against BT or Phorm. Officials in Brussels believe the episode has exposed deficiencies in UK privacy law and have demanded it is tightened. A prosecution under RIPA might help persuade the Commission or court that current legislation is adequate to protect internet users.

    BT dropped plans to implement Phorm's system following the public furore over their secret trials. The advertising firm has since been forced to abandon the UK market to seek partnerships with ISPs in Asia and South America. News that BT remains under threat of a criminal prosecution will be particularly unwelcome in the office of Ian Livingstone, the group's chief executive. As boss of BT Retail at the time, he was the senior executive directly responsible for the secret Phorm trials. ®




    fingerprint A school has provoked uproar after taking children's fingerprints without permission from their parents.

    Pupils were 'frogmarched' to be fingerprinted so they could use touch screens in the canteen to have money deducted from their account, thereby speeding up lunch queues. Capital City Academy in Brent, north London, was later forced to apologise and wiped all prints it obtained before asking for consent.

    It also introduced an opt-out for parents uncomfortable with the technology, allowing pupils to enter a four-digit pin code instead of scanning their print. The revelation comes as teachers today warned schools are routinely taking children's fingerprints without permission from their parents. As many as 3,500 schools take biometric data from pupils to speed up basic administration such as buying canteen lunches or borrowing library books. Youngsters place their thumbs on a scanner and lunch money is deducted from their account or they are registered as borrowing a book. But there were warnings today that schools are bringing in the systems without seeking parents' consent. Teachers fear the failure to secure consent is widespread because there is no requirement in law to gain active permission, and consulting parents at all is simply seen as 'good practice'.

    The Association of the Teachers and Lecturers, meeting for its annual conference in Manchester yesterday, passed a motion demanding the union investigates the issue. Hank Roberts, an ATL executive member, said civil liberties were being eroded. 'There has been a severe diminution of civil liberties and freedoms in this country and we face the danger of more and worse to come,' he said. 'The important thing is the question of parental consent.

    'Do you want your kids to have their fingerprints taken without your knowledge and without your consent? I think that's wrong. I think it's completely and fundamentally wrong. 'These things are going on now without that occurring, and it's multiplying. 'It's outrageous that children's fingerprints can be taken without parents' consent.' Azra Haque, a teacher from Brent, said: 'Should we allow Big Brother in our schools? 'Today's children are in general much more closely monitored than previous generations. 'We really do need a strong and explicit law in this regard.'

    At Capital City Academy, staff attempted last year to introduce fingerprinting technology to speed up lunch queues. But one mother said: 'My son was frogmarched by one of the teachers to be fingerprinted even though he did not want to. 'I was just furious. There has been no consultation with parents; they just went ahead and did it.' In a subsequent letter to parents, which sought written consent, acting principal Debbie Ramm-Harpley said: 'We would like to take this opportunity to express our sincere apologies for any confusion or distress caused as a result of the biometrics process.'

    The academy's new principal, Alex Thomas, said: 'The school went through a process of letting parents know that we would be introducing the system and when it was originally conceived, consent was not actively sought. 'Although parents were made aware through a series of letters, this obviously caused some concern.' He stressed the school had wiped the first set of scans taken before parental permission had been sought and started again with only those pupils whose parents had given their consent. Supporters of the technology insist the data is not stored as fingerprints but unique number streams derived from the prints, rendering it useless to all but the school using the system.

    But the systems have still raised concerns over the security of pupils' sensitive data. Meanwhile Dr Emmeline Taylor, who conducted a study on surveillance of pupils funded by Salford University, has revealed that 3,500 schools in the UK - one in seven - are estimated to be using fingerprint technology. A 2007 survey by the Liberal Democrats found that out of 285 schools using fingerprint scanners, only 48 had first sought parental consent.

    A spokesman for the Department for Children, Schools and Families said: 'It is down to each school to judge best how to manage their own day-to-day running. 'But we've made clear that it is plain common sense for heads to consult parents about potentially sensitive issues like this. 'If parents want to opt out, then the school should listen to them and consider alternate arrangements.'


    toilet spies This is an absolute breach of human rights just like the full body scanners at airports. Everyone has a right to privacy especially for their children and these New World Order perverts wont stop until the people rise up and take back control from the psychopaths now running the world for their own perverted and depraved ends.

    You can imagine my surprise after I paid my 50pence to use the public bathroom, walked in and found myself staring at not just one but three ceiling mounted video surveillance cameras. I had to get real close to their enclosures to convince myself that I wasn't seeing things. Not only was it really there, but it was a Pan-Tilt-Zoom model with a microphone to top it off. Must get some great noises coming from there. It has also been reported that London officials are now installing cameras with speakers to allow them to talk as well as see and listen. Perhaps its just me, but I had absolutely no idea that this was legal anywhere, let alone in downtown London, UK. Sure I knew that London has more cameras per square mile than any other country on the planet, but in bathrooms?! How are they getting away with that one? It is appalling!

    According to the London Assembly of Liberal Democrats, London has been outfitted with over 500,000 surveillance cameras. Other put the number much higher at 1.4million cameras but nobody is telling what the real number is. Another few 10,000 cameras have been installed in taxis and police cars as well. Sounds a bit big brother to me folks, downright scary in fact. Now it gets scarier when you consider that the vast majority of these camera feeds are not sent encrypted across the wire. This makes hacking these video feeds trivial, just a simple wire tap.

    Here's a scenario, I wake up, walk out of my hotel room and see a camera in the hallway watching me. I get into the elevator and look up to smile at the camera there, I walk through the lobby and out to the street. Along the way half a dozen cameras watched me walk less than 200ft. I get in my cab and the camera in there watches me all the way to my destination. I walk into the building followed by 4 cameras. I use the public restroom, 3 cameras watch me in there. I head up the elevator to my office on the 2nd floor and smile at the camera there. I walk down the hall to my office while under surveillance the whole way. I close my office glass door. Turns out the camera in the building has a vantage angle through my glass door and the outside camera on the opposite street corner pole has a clean shot into my office through the windows. I'm feeling a lot of love right now. So I logon to the internet and start surfing. Hmmm. Now I guess they are watching physical me and virtual me at the same time as they inspect the bits and bytes I send ripping around the network. Just in the last couple years, U.S. cities (like my hometown of Denver) have begun installing their own public video surveillance systems in a big way. Now I need to check and see if U.S. cities are also watching you in the public bathroom.

    The image is a shot I took in a London public bathroom. Notice the two cameras on the ceiling. Another one was behind me on the other wall facing towards these cameras. They had all of the angles covered that’s for sure. Don't want to miss any of the action.



    euro spies MILLIONS of Britons face being snooped on by a new European intelligence agency which has been handed frightening powers to pry into our lives.

    Europol can access personal information on anyone – including their political opinions and sexual preferences – if it suspects, rightly or wrongly, that they may be involved in any “preparatory act” which could lead to criminal activity. The vagueness of the Hague-based force’s remit sparked furious protests yesterday with critics warning that the EU snoopers threaten our right to free speech.

    It is understood the agency will concentrate on anyone thought “xenophobic” or likely to commit a crime involving the environment, computers or motor vehicles. This could include covert monitoring of people who deny the existence of climate change or speak out on controversial issues. Paul Nuttall, chairman of the UK Independence Party, said: “I am horrified. We thought Gordon Brown’s Big Brother state was bad enough but at least we are going to kick him out in May. These guys we cannot sack until we leave the EU.” James Welch, legal director of campaign group Liberty, said: “We have huge concerns that Europol appears to have been given powers to hold very sensitive information and to investigate matters that aren’t even crimes in this country. Any extension of police powers at any level needs to be properly debated and scrutinised.” Until January 1, Europol was a police office funded by various states to help tackle international organised crime. But it has been reborn as the official criminal intelligence-gathering arm of the EU and Brussels has vastly increased its powers.

    It can now target more than simply organised crime and the burden of proof required to begin monitoring an individual has been downgraded. Europol has also been absorbed into the EU superstructure, so it will be centrally funded, sweeping away a key check on its independence. Campaigners last night expressed concern over the vague list of “serious crimes” which the agency can help investigate, which include racism and xenophobia, environmental crime and corruption. Among personal details that can be gathered and stored are “behavioural data” including “lifestyle and routine; movements; places frequented”, tax position and profiles of DNA and voice. Where relevant, Europol will also be able to keep data on a person’s “political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs or trade union membership and data concerning health or sex life”.

    Sean Gabb, director of the Libertarian Alliance, warned that it threatened our right to free speech. “It doesn’t surprise me that Europol has been handed these rather frightening powers,” he said. “We now live in a pan-European state so it was to be expected that it would have a federal police force with powers over us. “There is a real danger that opposition to EU policies could make an individual liable to arrest. “For example, if Brussels adopts a hard-line stance on climate change, it’s conceivable that someone who broadcasts their scepticism of climate change may be accused of committing an environmental crime because they have undermined the EU’s efforts to save mankind.”

    Timothy Kirkhope, Conservative leader in the European Parliament, said: “Europol’s new mandate has significantly expanded its powers. “There is a real chance that the vague mandate will enable it to gradually extend its areas of intervention even further.” The Home Office insisted the changes were in Britain’s interests. A spokesman said: “Europol is now in a much stronger position to better support our fight against serious and organised crime and terrorism.”


    failscan So let's say you've arrived at one of the airports that has full-body scanners and you're waiting in line to go through security to reach your flight gate. You notice that they are sending the line through the massive machines, and you're concerned about your privacy or radiation or whatever, and you wonder: do you really have to go through a full-body scan? The quick answer is yes and no...

    YES you should go through the full-body scanner.
    Notice that we used the word "should" there, because going through one of the machines is not compulsory. Still, if you stay in line and don't pipe up and take your turn showing your goodies virtually to the TSA, then the lines move quicker and you get to your gate faster and (hopefully) without arousing the suspicion and alarm of security agents.

    NO you shouldn't go through the full-bod scanner.
    Currently—because they haven't quite nailed down whether or not to force people to go through a full-body scan where available—it is your right to decline the full-body scan. The TSA cannot make you go into the machine if you say no, and there is an argument for saying no and therefore protesting the use of these machines.

    If you say no to a full-body scan, be warned that you are then submitting yourself to a physical pat-down. Usually the TSA will honor your request for a female or male agent based on your gender, but if it's busy and they're stressed and short-staffed and you look suspicious, then don't expect that courtesy. Anyone who denies a body scan is subject to advanced screening, and be warned that if the agent feels that they don't have a great handle on your pat-down, you could be one chosen to the full stripsearch treatment. Woo-wee.


    pentagon 'The Pentagon is spying on us,' claims whistleblower website Wikileaks after leaking top secret documents

    The Pentagon has been accused of spying on a whistleblower website that specialises in leaking top secret documents. The US Army has already deemed Wikileaks a security threat to military operations. That much is known because the online muckrakers posted the classified 2008 report from the Army Counterintelligence Center on its own site earlier this month.

    The report also called for an investigation into Wikileaks to track down moles and demanded prosecutions to scare potential informants from contacting the rogue organisation. But now Wikileaks - which won Amnesty International’s new media award last year - has issued a flurry of Tweets claiming its editors are already being investigated. Judging from the messages, the site believes the probe is linked to its plan to make public unencrypted footage of an air strike in Afghanistan on May 7 last year that killed 97 civilians.

    WikiLeaks: Tweeted claims its editors are already being investigated

    The Pentagon reportedly planned to release the video, but back-pedalled after it allegedly turned out to be more incriminating than at first thought. Wikileaks has promised to reveal a ‘Pentagon Murder Cover-up’ at the National Press Club in Washington on April 5, although it hasn’t offered any further information about the event. The most recent Wikileaks Tweets, in chronological order, read:

    * WikiLeaks is currently under an aggressive US and Icelandic surveillance operation. Following/photographing/filming/detaining.
    * If anything happens to us, you know why: it is our Apr 5 film. And you know who is responsible.
    * Two under State Dep diplomatic cover followed our editor from Iceland to on Thursday.
    * One related person was detained for 22 hours. Computer’s seized.That’s
    * We know our possession of the decrypted airstrike video is now being discussed at the highest levels of US command.
    * If you know more about the operations against us, contact
    * We have been shown secret photos of our production meetings and been asked specific questions during detention related to the airstrike.
    * We have airline records of the State Dep/CIA tails. Don’t think you can get away with it. You cannot. This is WikiLeaks.
    * To those worrying about us – we’re fine, and will issue a suitable riposte shortly.’

    The Icelandic link is thought to involve Wikileaks involvement in helping to draft legislation that would help make the country a safe haven for investigative journalists by passing the strongest combination of source protection, freedom of speech and libel tourism protection laws in the world. The site, run by a nine-person board, aims to expose corruption and wrongdoing in the public and private sector by providing the opportunity for people to leak documents without giving themselves away. Documents Wikileak have leaked in the past include emails hacked from former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s private account, pager messages from 9/11,controversial emails from climate change scientists and operating guidelines for Guantanamo Bay.

    Leaks that might have particularly infuriated the US Defence Department included the site’s publication in 2007 of almost the entire order of battle for American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Governments like North Korea and Thailand have also tried to prevent access to the non-profit site, claiming it was revealing information criticising their policies. The Defence Department had no comment last night.


    spamhaus We have had endless trouble with an outfit called Spamhaus who are acting as the secret unofficial censors of the internet . We should know as we have had a number of Web hosters pull websites on the strength of Spamhaus's sabotage techniques.
    To check what they are up to use the 'Check to see if your IP address is on a blacklist' link and if it is you should immediately reboot your hub if you have broadband to ensure your IP address is reassigned and SPAMHAUS cannot interfere with your communications.
  • Check to see if your IP address is on a blacklist
  • Tim Bolen Vs. Spamhaus: The Story of the Man
  • Spamhaus domain name may be suspended
  • Will Spamhaus Get Shut Down Over Dispute?
  • Secretive Spamhaus twitter pages
  • US Internet "Free Speech" Tightly Controlled by Secret Group

    An airport worker allegedly caught ogling images of a female colleague in a full-body scanner faces the sack after being given a police warning for harassment.

    The Heathrow worker, named by The Sun newspaper as 25-year-old John Laker, allegedly made lewd remarks to colleague Jo Margetson, 29, after she entered an X-ray machine by mistake. She reported the matter to her bosses and to police.

    A spokeswoman for BAA, which runs Heathrow, said: "We treat any allegations of inappropriate behaviour or misuse of security equipment very seriously and these claims are investigated thoroughly. "If these claims are found to be substantiated, we will take appropriate action." The new full-body scanners are being rolled out across UK airports following the failed Christmas Day bomb plot to blow up a jet over Detroit in the US. Their introduction has been opposed by some groups who fear the revealing nature of the images the scanners provide could breach people's rights. The question of privacy was raised in a report on airport security by the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee. The committee said: "Having witnessed these full-body scanners working at first hand, we are confident that the privacy concerns that have been expressed in relation to these devices are overstated and that full body scanners are no more an invasion of privacy than manual 'pat-downs' or searches of bags."

    One of the bodies that has questioned the legality of scanners is the Equality and Human Rights Commission. Responding to the Home Affairs Committee report, the commission said: "We believe there is a risk that the way body scanning was introduced in UK airports breaches discrimination law, as well as breaching passengers' human right to privacy."

  • Heathrow guard ‘used scanner to leer at colleague’s naked body’



  • The following is a real anti-terrorism advert played during popular UK radio show talksport, which effectively says somebody who likes their privacy and prefers not to be in debt to banks by using cash is a terrorist. The image is also a real poster advert around London. Nice all seeing eyes there.


    lie detector Libel laws silenced me, says Francisco Lacerda, critic of lie detector system

    England’s libel laws have been used to silence scientific critics of lie detection technology on which the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) has spent £2.4 million. An academic from Sweden will tell MPs today how a paper challenging the principles behind the voice risk analysis (VRA) system was withdrawn by his publisher after legal threats from its manufacturer. In an interview with The Times before a House of Commons seminar on his case, Francisco Lacerda, professor of phonetics at Stockholm University, said that the case showed how English law was damaging science abroad as well as in the UK.

    Because English was the international language of science, and many important academic journals were based in Britain, anybody who published controversial work could be at risk of being sued, he said. Libel law was also suppressing information that should be available in the public interest, he added. A public interest defence and controls on costs were needed to protect free scientific debate. “I feel my duty to return to society the knowledge I have been gathering cannot be done because of the English libel laws,” Professor Lacerda said. “MPs have to find a way to allow scientists to challenge claims freely. “It is a big problem, not only for English scientists. If you publish in English, as scientists must, you are at risk.” Professor Lacerda has come to London to support the Libel Reform Coalition, which is campaigning for changes in the law after a series of high-profile defamation actions against scientists.

    Simon Singh, the science writer, is being sued by the British Chiropractic Association for questioning the evidence for its medical claims, and Peter Wilmshurst, a cardiologist, is being sued over his criticisms of an American company’s heart implant trial. The campaign has been backed by Nick Clegg, the Lib Dem leader, and more than 40,000 people have signed a petition calling for reform. In 2007, Professor Lacerda and Anders Eriksson, of Gothenburg University, published an article entitled “Charlatanry in Forensic Speech Science” in the International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law. It criticised the science behind analysis technologies that purport to identify stressed voices, which may indicate lying. One VRA system, designed by Nemesysco, an Israeli company, is being evaluated in 24 pilot studies by the DWP, as a means of highlighting potential benefit fraud. The DWP has spent £2.4 million on the pilots, which are due to report back soon. Nemesysco threatened the journal with a libel action over the article, which was withdrawn from its website.

    Amir Liberman, who devised the technology, said the paper contained inaccuracies that could damage his business, and that he had particularly objected to the title’s implication that he was a charlatan. “Scientists’ words are taken for more than face value and therefore call for even higher responsibility,” he said. “Nobody should be protected against gross slander and defamation, and this includes scientists.” Professor Lacerda said he felt it important that governments, insurance companies and other agencies that might buy the technology were aware of his concerns. The withdrawal of the paper will limit access to his work. “We expected a rebuttal of the claims, but in the academic literature, not in court,” he said. “That has a suffocating effect on science.”

    A spokeswoman for the DWP said officials running the trial were aware of the Lacerda paper, and that the department had a duty “to do everything we can to stop fraud in the benefit system". Tracey Brown, of Sense About Science, which is part of the Libel Reform Coalition, said: “With such high costs and few defences, it is not surprising that threats of libel action from big companies succeed in getting publications withdrawn and critical views silenced.” Dr Singh said that the case showed the international reach of English libel law. “It is bad enough that English libel law can intimidate British scientists, but when our law begins to silence overseas academics such as Professor Lacerda then we need to take responsibility for the global chill caused by our legal system.”

  • Testing the Truth VIDEO
  • Truth Wristband Kit


  • Fraud Office probe demanded into Westminster Council
  • Will UK Serious Fraud Office investigate Westminster Council part in £200m Parking scandal
  • Two Westminster Council senior officers under police investigation for suspected fraud
  • Masonic run Westminster council conjure up another £7m parking scam

    dwp Internet Censorship DWP Style

    As you will read elsewhere on site I became the victim of a violation of the Data Protection Act 1998 by the Department for Work and Pensions and dully followed the appropriate procedures for complaint. This was hampered by the fact the DWP lied claiming they did not have the identity of the member of staff who had committed the offence. After many years of being stonewalled and passed pillar to post the DWP let slip they knew the identity of the officer all along and therefore I had become a victim of years of Unlawful Malicious Vindictive Persecution which had resulted in substantial legal fees, the destruction of my marriage and years of stress and years of lost time devoted to the charade.

    Unable to obtain redress I set up to warn the public as to the activities of the DWP, the Information Tribunal, the Information Commissioner, the Parliamentary Ombudsman and the disinterest of my Labour MP Ian Pearson. Although it was established I had suffered a breach of data protection, the DWP employed solicitor Nigel Fisher to try to cover up for them. Mr Fisher became aware of the website and threatened the Webmaster with legal action. The Webmaster ignored Mr Fisher’s threats so Mr Fisher had solicitors Field Fisher Waterhouse threaten the host. The host buckled immediately, broke their contract and closed the site leaving us solely with a link to the word “FORBIDDEN”. This reminded me of WW2 movies where, in Nazi Germany, we can see signs, which read: “VERBOTEN!”

    A quick visit to Webster’s Dictionary online for “Verboten” brings up the following: “FORBIDDEN, especially: prohibited by dictate.”

    Is it we are seeing the Department for Work and Pensions operating under law or simply operating by way of dictatorship? The site now closed, at considerable cost and therefore injury to myself, a new host was obtained namely Pipex. Field Fisher and Waterhouse were soon at it again and this time Pipex buckled and pulled the site. The Webmaster convinced Pipex there was no substance to the DWP’s allegation of defamation. Pipex put the site back up but the sustained attack by Field Fisher and Waterhouse caused them to pull the site permanently. Having likewise suffered a considerable loss of data had to start again to some extent by scratch the site currently cobbled together from old files however restructuring is ongoing and time consuming. endeavoured to establish from Nigel Fisher what these alleged defamatory comments were as the site exists to uphold the claims of the present Deputy Prime Minister and “provide transparency” concerning her former department the DCA now Ministry of Justice, which is supposed to police the Department for Work and Pensions concerning their lawful or otherwise unlawful conduct. Given the principle role of the site is to expose unlawful and other misconduct by the DWP and related bodies it is important to us that we have our facts right and do not promote material, which is defamatory. Needless to say no matter how much Nigel Fisher was pressed he failed to respond. We conclude therefore his allegations are exactly that, without substance. Given the harassment of the site by the agents of the Department for Work and Pensions I became injured again. The site had no option but to leave the country and obtain hosting oversees.

    CARIS defines “asylum-seeker” as: “someone of any age who has fled his or her home country to find a safe place elsewhere.”, following sustained attack by the UK government is therefore now an Internet Asylum Seeker fleeing the British Dictatorship.



    body scanner Muslim woman and companion gave religious and medical reasons for refusing scan at Manchester airport

    Manchester and Heathow are the first airports in Britain to have full-body scanners. Two women, one a Muslim, have become the first people to be barred from boarding a flight because they refused to go through a full-body airport scanner. Manchester airport confirmed today that the women, who were booked to fly to Islamabad with Pakistan International Airlines, were told they could not get on the plane after they refused to be scanned for medical and religious reasons. The women had been selected at random, said the airport.

    The Muslim woman decided to forfeit her ticket and left her luggage at the airport. Her companion also left the airport saying she did not go through the scanner on medical grounds because she had an infection. The full-body scanners were introduced at Manchester and Heathrow last month after the Christmas Day bombing attempt in Detroit. The £80,000 Rapiscan machines show a clear body outline and have been described by critics as the equivalent of "virtual strip searching". While American transport authorities offer passengers a choice between going through the full-body scanner or going through a metal-arch scanner and a physical search, the British government has said that a refusal to go through the body scanner would bar passengers from boarding aircraft. A Manchester airport spokeswoman said: "Two female passengers who were booked to fly out of Terminal 2 refused to be scanned for medical reasons and religious reasons. In accordance with the government directive on scanners, they were not permitted to fly.

    "Body scanning is a big change for customers who are selected under the new rules and we are aware that privacy concerns are on our customers' minds, which is why we have strict procedures to reassure them that their privacy will be protected." A group of Muslim-American scholars, the Fiqh Council of North America, last month argued that going through the scanners would violate Islamic rules of modesty because they expose people's private parts. The pope has also expressed concerns. Heathrow airport has refused to comment on individual cases.

  • Airport denies body scanner photo claim by Bollywood star Shahrukh Khan