Author
|
Topic: London cops declare war on photography (Read 6531 times) |
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender: 
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.91
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
  
|
 |
London cops declare war on photography
« on: 2008-03-06 04:17:32 » |
 |
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/04/london-cops-declare.html
London cops declare war on photography
Posted by Cory Doctorow, March 4, 2008 2:39 PM | permalink
Thomas Hawk sez, "In what I can only view as troubling and a move surely to invite more backlash against photographers, London's Metropolitan police has launched a new counter-terrorism PR campaign complete with anti-photography propaganda. The campaign is meant to encourage people to turn in 'odd' seeming people that they see taking photographs."
"Thousands of people take photos every day," reads their advertisement being run in London's major newspapers. "What if one of them seems odd?"
[Blunderov] The hive-mind has responded with much hilarity.
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/05/remixing-the-london.html
Remixing the London police's anti-photographer terrror posters
Posted by Cory Doctorow, March 5, 2008 7:29 AM | permalink
Responding to the London Metropolitan Police's new anti-photographer snitch campaign, wherein posters urge Londoners to turn in people who might be taking pictures of CCTV cameras, many people have taken a crack at redesigning the posters to point out the absurdity of them.
[Bl.] here's my contribution
|
|
|
|
|
Fritz
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1746
Reputation: 8.85
Rate Fritz
|
|
Re:London cops declare war on photography
« Reply #1 on: 2008-03-23 23:19:57 » |
|
[MoEnzyme]
<snip>General,Serious Business,Re:Hypothetical Question for Hermit
« Reply #9 on: 2008-02-02 23:51:43 »
"My Pal Satan", by video humorist Sean Bedlam
http://youtube.com/watch?v=hbFiefwl2gk <Snip>
[Blunderov]<Snip>London cops declare war on photography<Snip>
[Fritz] “Only in England you say, Pity” … my contribution then to photography :-p
http://www.sendspace.com/file/ejmsut
[Fritz]Got access to a fast link for an afternoon and posted this. Thought after all the video posts I finally got to watch posted on CoV; I’d offer up what happens when an old geezer like me gets a camcorder and nonlinear editing software and the off spring leave their music on my hard drive.
Cheers & Thx
Fritz
|
Where there is the necessary technical skill to move mountains, there is no need for the faith that moves mountains -anon-
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.91
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
Re:London cops declare war on photography
« Reply #2 on: 2008-05-12 07:29:47 » |
|
[Blunderov] Lenin falls foul of the Old Bill in London.
One can almost hear the Plods in action (with a little malapropriation from http://www.jumpstation.ca/recroom/comedy/python/nudge.html )
[Knacker of the Yard]
Is your uh, is your wife interested in... photography, ay? 'Photographs, ay', he asked him knowingly?
[Lenin]
Photography?
[Knacker of the Yard]
Snap snap, grin grin, wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more?
[Lenin]
Holiday snaps, eh?
[Knacker of the Yard]
They could be, they could be taken on holiday.
Candid, you know, CANDID photography?
[Lenin]
No, no...
http://leninology.blogspot.com/2008/05/funny-thing-happened-on-way-through-w9.html
Sunday, May 11, 2008
A funny thing happened on the way through W9. posted by lenin
You all know about my hobby of taking photographs of London. Sometimes it's demo pics, sometimes it's pictures of obscure subjects, sometimes it's just pretty little vistas. Well, today I was out riding round the West End and up to Paddington, Harrow Road, Westbourne Park, and then was circling back home when I was stopped by two charming police officers. Now, this was just as I was standing on top of my bike on a bridge taking pictures of the scenery, trying to get a good view from what I guess is quite a lofty position. The trouble is, when some people see you going round taking pictures of things, alarm bells start ringing. Apparently, someone had called the cops, and their car sailed up next to me just as I was getting a lovely view of... what? Among other things, the bloody railway tracks some distance from Paddington Station. They advised me, while one of them looked through all the pictures on my digital camera, that this is the sort of thing that is liable to get one arrested under anti-terrorism legislation, what with it sort of being near a major transport hub. They further advised me that following arrest, one would usually end up being strip-searched and possibly questioned for quite a long time under what might prove to be testing circumstances. Luckily, I wasn't a student named Salam Abdulrahman, so I was not arrested or put through the indignity of being having my bottom examined up close by someone without the relevant proctological qualifications. In fact, I was treated courteously, and permitted to ride off into the sunset after an awkward fifteen minutes on the tarmac, a background check and a brief body search. However, it is interesting to think that, had there been a minor blip in the racial coding, it could have been a much worse experience. Had they not liked my answers, even, I would be answering more questions at Paddington Green nick. Not for illegal activity - of course, they allowed me to keep the pictures, and you can see pictures of Paddington station and the tracks on Google Images anyway - but because of the way in which New Labour legislation tolerates and encourages the selective criminalisation of legal conduct. So, that was a funny thing to happen.
Labels: anti-terrorism legislation, london, new labour, photographs
6:26:00 PM | Permalink | 37 new comments
[Blunderov] More crunchy goodness available at Lenin's tomb:
Latest Iraqi resistance statistics (including graphs)
Crisis and Hegemony
|
|
|
|
|
Fritz
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1746
Reputation: 8.85
Rate Fritz
|
|
Re:London cops declare war on photography
« Reply #3 on: 2008-05-12 13:40:35 » |
|
[Blunderrov]<snip> They further advised me that following arrest, one would usually end up being strip-searched and possibly questioned for quite a long time under what might prove to be testing circumstances<snip>
But they left out the funnest part .... electrocution for the masses :-)
An arrest with out hi-voltage, just seems 'pass'eh' now.
The end of the article at the site has some links to 'Home Office' PDFs
Cheers
Fritz
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/12/plods_love_their_tasers/
Taser gun usage soaring among UK cops
Proportion of actual shockings down, though
By Lewis Page → More by this author
Published Monday 12th May 2008 14:18 GMT
The Home Office has announced an increase in police use of Taser electroshock stun weapons in the UK, releasing figures up to the end of February today.
"The number of Taser uses and discharges has increased as more trained police officers have the authority to use them," according to an official statement accompanying the new figures. This suggests that there has been no tendency by police to use the weapons more often. Rather, the rise in Tasings supposedly comes about because more officers now carry them. A pilot scheme in which non-firearms-trained cops were given Tasers began in September.
The Home Office says the number of Taser "usages" between 1 September 2007 and 29 February 2008 was 252. Tasers were actually only discharged - meaning that electric barbs were launched from them to shock a target - in 31 situations, which the Home Office sees as "indicating that drawing or aiming the Taser is enough of a deterrent in most situations".
The Home Office seems statement is disingenuous on several fronts. Firstly, the 252 usages from September to the end of February refers only to the new "specially trained unit" (STU) taser plods. Most taser usage in the UK is actually by authorised firearms officers (AFOs).
Looking at government figures just for the AFOs, we see that in the three months and ten days from 20 July to 30 November 2007, the firearms cops made use of their Tasers on 163 occasions. Over the following three months up to 29 February, the same policemen used Tasers on a further 290 occasions, a rise of more than 77 per cent.
The AFOs, unlike the new STUs, haven't been manning up over this period. They are simply using their Tasers a lot more often, and the government should probably admit this rather than trying to pretend it isn't happening.
Another bit of naughtiness is the suggestion that drawing and aiming usually does the trick. In fact, you don't need to "discharge", or fire, a Taser in order to shock someone with it. The weapon can simply be placed against a suspect for a contact zapping, without being discharged. This move, known to the police as a "drive stun", isn't included in the "discharge" numbers.
In fact, the real figure for Taser use across the UK since last year is not the Home Office headliner of 252 uses with 31 stunnings. Buried in the relevant pdfs, we find that there were 705 usages from last July to February, including 155 discharges with barbs fired and a further 33 "drive stun" shockings. Suspects were shocked 27 per cent of the time when Tasers were drawn.
Furthermore, quibblers will note that it's actually very rare for drawing or aiming to produce surrender. Most of the cases where subjects weren't actually shocked involved cops using the Taser's red-dot aiming device to scare people. Often they found it necessary to go further and "arc" their weapons, causing a visible crackle of juice to pass between the contacts.
There's probably a case to be made for Tasers, despite the media hysteria around their use. Being shocked is very nasty, but it's kinder than almost anything else the police might do to make people comply with lawful orders. The stunguns may make casual brutality a little easier, but in fact a naughty truncheon-flick or kick to the groin of a cuffed suspect isn't much more difficult, and a lot easier to deny afterwards - given that Tasers generate records automatically whenever they get used. The unpleasant reality is that being a helpless prisoner leaves you open to abuse. You don't need a Taser or even a stick to torture or abuse captives in the most excruciating fashion; all you need is the will to do so.
That said, the sort of shiftiness the Home Office has seen fit to indulge in today doesn't help their argument at all. They'd do better to admit the truth - that Taser use is simply becoming more popular among British police - than try this kind of silly obfuscation.
They might even point out that the proportion of cases involving actual shocking is down overall; since April 2004, when the AFOs first tooled up, people have been shocked in almost 40 per cent of incidents - but over the six months to February, this had fallen to 27 per cent.
Anyway. Crunch the numbers for yourself, here and here. ®
[Fritz]Just to include us Canuks:
Mounties taser bed-ridden octagenarian
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/12/hospital_taser_incident/
|
Where there is the necessary technical skill to move mountains, there is no need for the faith that moves mountains -anon-
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.91
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
Re:London cops declare war on photography
« Reply #4 on: 2008-05-20 03:14:54 » |
|
[Blunderov] <wipes tears of mirth from eyes> Ah me! Guerilla film making of the highest order. What a wonderful counterpoint this story makes to the thread theme of "suspicious" photography! Apparently all the terrorists have to do is demand public footage of the targets they're interested in. No need to risk Knacker of the Yard taking an interest in their little hobby at all.
Interestingly, the video has vanished from the U Tube site for some reason. It's hard to imagine that the band would not want their video to go viral, which it was very nicely poised to do, and so it seems there may have been dirty work at the crossroads. Perhaps photographs of England are now a state secret? Apparently some laws in the USA are set to become state secrets too. 
http://blog.wired.com/music/2008/05/music-video-con.html
Music Video Constructed from London's Surveillance Cameras
By Eliot Van Buskirk May 14, 2008 | 11:54:41
The Get Out Clause has too strong a ColdPlay gene for us to truly appreciate them on the merits of their music, but the way they made the music video for "Paper" was pure brilliance. Nearly the entire video was captured using the British government's closed-circuit surveillance cameras.
As part of the UK's apparent drive to become a full-fledged police state, the British government has installed these cameras all over the place, reportedly driving some youths to wear cavernous hoodies to make it harder for would-be overlords to track their movement and behavior. There are so many cameras in London that the average person on the street has their photo taken by the government approximately every six seconds. In return for these repeated invasions of privacy, only three percent of the country's solved crimes have apparently involved evidence gathered from the cameras.
At least citizens are allowed to request any footage in which they appeared within the last 30 days. The Get Out Clause used this aspect of the law to their advantage, getting the city to film its music video for free -- a serious bargain, considering that the video is practically guaranteed to go viral.
|
|
|
|
|
Fritz
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1746
Reputation: 8.85
Rate Fritz
|
|
Re:London cops declare war on photography
« Reply #5 on: 2008-05-21 18:20:26 » |
|
Quote:| [blunderov]Perhaps photographs of England are now a state secret? |
Canada is now stepping up to the plate; clearly the colonies will not be out done by what is left of 'Her Majesties Empire'.
What are we going to do with all the film footage of flashers in the park and the sorted goings on .... this footage from the parks could supplement the porn industry. With Music videos and Porn all taken care of will this mean a collapse of the video production industry ?
But in Canada we can talk to the folks on camera ... I'm trying to visualize the conversation: " ....really sir, if your not holding it in both hands we're not impressed ...."
I guess I should get a new rain coats ...... 
Fritz
http://ottsun.canoe.ca/News/OttawaAndRegion/2008/05/20/5618236.html
Talking camera to patrol city parks
Plan could run afoul of privacy rules
By BETH JOHNSTON, Sun Media
The city has some answering to do to the provincial privacy commissioner about a pilot project for video surveillance of city parks.
The city’s first mobile Proactive Audio Video system was unveiled yesterday outside the Fringewood Community Centre in Stittsville after community members complained of after-hours shenanigans in the park.
City officials hope the live-feed camera, which will be monitored at City Hall from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m., will deter vandals.
The device has voice capability, so the operator can tell trespassers to move along.
But the province has strict rules about installation of video surveillance in public areas. The rules limit who can access the recordings and how long they can be kept and spell out who can destroy incriminating footage and when.
“(The guidelines) are aimed at municipalities and police forces, which raises a number of questions for them to address if they’re using surveillance,” said Ontario Information and Privacy Commission spokesman Bob Spence.
Bob Gauvreau, the city’s manager of corporate security, scoffed at the suggestion that the cameras are an invasion of privacy.
“This system only works after 11 o’clock when the parks are closed, there’s no expectation of privacy,” he said. “If you have no expectation of privacy, no one can infringe on your privacy.”
Gauvreau expects a return on the $130-a-night investment to rent the mobile unit.
He estimates that from January 2007 to date, vandals caused $168,000 worth of damage to city parks. City pools were damaged to the tune of $700,000 before they installed video surveillance, he said.
The pilot project is a response to residents’ complaints — and based on what’s caught on camera, a decision will be made whether or not to invest in permanent cameras for the park.
“People were quite concerned with what was going on here at night,” he said, noting an incident where a car was driven across a soccer field.
“We want to be able to turn the parks into their proper use. We’ve eliminated the broken bottles, the syringes all these other things that we find in parks.”
Anything the cameras record of crimes will be handed over to Ottawa police, Gauvreau said.
“If the police request it and it’s ordered by the court, yes,” he said, adding that police won’t need a warrant. “We release it, they sign a form and they become responsible.”
Spence said his policy department will talk to city officials to ensure the surveillance camera installation is by the book. Whether the video should be shared with police is another issue, he said.
“That might be part of the conversation.”
Stittsville-Kanata West Coun. Shad Qadri said late-night park abusers have been getting “more boisterous, more belligerent” and the city needs to protect taxpayers’ assets.
“(Vandals are doing) graffiti, hanging out, other activities that I am not aware of that are happening in vehicles,” he said.
“If it takes something like this, then I am all for it. All we’re doing is enforcing the bylaw.”
|
Where there is the necessary technical skill to move mountains, there is no need for the faith that moves mountains -anon-
|
|
|
Fritz
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1746
Reputation: 8.85
Rate Fritz
|
|
Re:London cops declare war on photography
« Reply #6 on: 2008-05-22 15:56:28 » |
|
Had this passed my way; it seems to fit into this thread.
Cheers
Fritz
Teenager faces prosecution for calling Scientology 'cult'
* Anil Dawar http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/anildawar
* guardian.co.uk http://www.guardian.co.uk/
* Tuesday May 20 2008
* Article history
This article was first published on guardian.co.uk http://www.guardian.co.uk/ on
Tuesday May 20 2008. It was last updated at 09:53 on May 21 2008.
The Church of Scientology Centre in Queen Victoria Street, London. Photograph: Sarah
Lee
A teenager is facing prosecution for using the word "cult" to describe the Church of
Scientology.
The unnamed 15-year-old was served the summons by City of London police when he took
part in a peaceful demonstration opposite the London headquarters of the
controversial religion.
Officers confiscated a placard with the word "cult" on it from the youth, who is
under 18, and a case file has been sent to the Crown Prosecution Service.
A date has not yet been set for him to appear in court.
The decision to issue the summons has angered human rights activists and support
groups for the victims of cults.
The incident happened during a protest against the Church of Scientology on May 10.
Demonstrators from the anti-Scientology group, Anonymous, who were outside the
church's £23m headquarters near St Paul's cathedral, were banned by police from
describing Scientology as a cult by police because it was "abusive and insulting".
Writing on an anti-Scientology website, the teenager facing court said: "I brought a
sign to the May 10th protest that said: 'Scientology is not a religion, it is a
dangerous cult.'
"'Within five minutes of arriving I was told by a member of the police that I was
not allowed to use that word, and that the final decision would be made by the
inspector."
A policewoman later read him section five of the Public Order Act and "strongly
advised" him to remove the sign. The section prohibits signs which have
representations or words which are threatening, abusive or insulting.
The teenager refused to back down, quoting a 1984 high court ruling from Mr Justice
Latey, in which he described the Church of Scientology as a "cult" which was
"corrupt, sinister and dangerous".
After the exchange, a policewoman handed him a court summons and removed his sign.
On the website he asks for advice on how to fight the charge: "What's the likelihood
I'll need a lawyer? If I do have to get one, it'll have to come out of my pocket
money."
Writing on the same website, another anonymous demonstrator said: "We also protested
outside another Scientology building in Tottenham Court Road which is policed by a
separate force, the Metropolitan police, who have never tried to stop us using the
word cult.
"We're completely peaceful protesters expressing a perfectly valid opinion. This
whole thing stinks."
Liberty director, Shami Chakrabarti, said: "This barmy prosecution makes a mockery
of Britain's free speech traditions.
"After criminalising the use of the word 'cult', perhaps the next step is to ban the
words 'war' and 'tax' from peaceful demonstrations?"
Ian Haworth, from the Cult Information Centre which provides advice for victims of
cults and their families, said: "This is an extraordinary situation. If it wasn't so
serious it would be farcical. The police's job is to protect and serve. Who is being
served and who is being protected in this situation? I find it very worrying.
"Scientology is well known to my organisation, and has been of great concern to me
for 22 years. I get many calls from families with loved ones involved and ex-members
who are in need of one form of help."
The City of London police came under fire two years ago when it emerged that more
than 20 officers, ranging from constable to chief superintendent, had accepted gifts
worth thousands of pounds from the Church of Scientology.
The City of London Chief Superintendent, Kevin Hurley, praised Scientology for
"raising the spiritual wealth of society" during the opening
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/nov/22/freedomofinformation.religion>
of its headquarters in 2006.
Last year a video praising Scientology emerged featuring Ken Stewart, another of the
City of London's chief superintendents, although he is not a member of the group.
The group was founded by the science-fiction writer L Ron Hubbard in 1952 and
espouses the idea that humans are descended from an exiled race of aliens called
Thetans.
The church continues to attract controversy over claims that it separates members
from their families and indoctrinates followers.
A spokeswoman for the force said today: "City of London police had received
complaints about demonstrators using the words 'cult' and 'Scientology kills' during protests against the Church of Scientology.
"Following advice from the Crown Prosecution Service some demonstrators were warned verbally and in writing that their signs breached section five of the Public Order Act.
"One demonstrator continued to display a placard despite police warnings and wasreported for an offence under section five. A file on the case will go to the CPS."
A CPS spokesman said no specific advice was given to police regarding the boy'splacard.
"In April, prior to this demonstration, as part of our normal working relationshipwe gave the City of London police general advice on the law around demonstrationsand religiously aggravated crime in particular.
"We did not advise on this specific case prior to the summons being issued -whichthe police can do without reference to us - but if we receive a file we will reviewit in the normal way according to the code for crown prosecutors."
Just ask this teen.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/may/20/1?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront
|
Where there is the necessary technical skill to move mountains, there is no need for the faith that moves mountains -anon-
|
|
|
Hermit
Archon
Posts: 4287
Reputation: 8.94
Rate Hermit
Prime example of a practically perfect person
|
|
Re:London cops declare war on photography
« Reply #7 on: 2008-05-22 19:16:14 » |
|
All conventional religions have their fanatics. The pScientology cult has more of them, much more dangerous and far more persistent than most. Which leads me to wonder, if the pScientologists, with their glorification of L Ron Hubbard and his dreadful 'pscience fiction' can't be described as a cult (particularly given their non grata status all over Europe, and repeated run ins with tax authorities, etc), what can be? Or has the UK now outlawed the word in its entirety. Silly buggers if they have. Words do not cause a fraction of the harm of most religions and "cult" is useful as it describes many such entities.
Mind you, the article might yet be a little too rough on the UK. As Keith Henson can witness, exercising one's supposed freedom of speech in the USA can destroy your life if you attempt to use it to speak about the pscientologists and their murderous habits.
Why anyone might think that this group is worthy of protection, other than in the same way as the rather less threatening (and fictional) Dr. Hannibal Lecter might be said to require protection, leaves me completely baffled. Then again, I hold a similar opinion not only on other cults (like the TM movement), but also about some religions that others regards as main stream - like the American Presbyterians and other Pentabapticostalfundamentalists(TM) of the same insane ilk.
Kind Regards
Hermit
|
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
|
|
|
Fritz
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1746
Reputation: 8.85
Rate Fritz
|
|
If you download "the al Qaeda manual," never share it
« Reply #8 on: 2008-06-02 18:06:18 » |
|
Quote:| [Hermit]<snip>Then again, I hold a similar opinion not only on other cults (like the TM movement), but also about some religions that others regards as main stream - like the American Presbyterians and other Pentabapticostalfundamentalists(TM) of the same insane ilk.<snip> |
[Fritz]I've always had a soft spot for the Lutherans (they let me get away), since they seem to me to bring together the traits of British Presbyterians, the pain of Anglicans note having a pope and the ability of the Aryan race to offend; so if I may be so bold: "Pentabapticostalfundamentalistluthaireans."
So I wonder if posting a post about downloading manuals will be found offensive .... but then I'm not considered motivative by many. 
The US of A is looking pretty good compared to Empire that gave the Dominion Canada its freedom once upon a time.
Sigh
Fritz
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/30/notts_al_qaeda_manual_case/
Download al Qaeda manuals from the DoJ, go to prison?
In the UK it's all down to your motivation
By George Smith, Dick Destiny → More by this author
Published Friday 30th May 2008 11:16 GMT
Analysis If you download "the al Qaeda manual," never share it, even if you're a scholar-in-training studying terrorism. Especially if you and the recipient go by the wrong kind of names.
In mid-May, University of Nottingham master's student Rizwaan Sabir apparently sent the electronic manual to a school clerk, Hicham Yezza, for printing. This triggered an investigation in which counter-terror police arrested the two and held them for six days, after which Sabir was released without charge. However, Yezza was held on an immigration violation and is in custody, threatened with deportation to Algeria.
Reg readers know now that reading the wrong stuff in the UK gets you on the fast track to prison for one possession of something likely to be of use to potential terrorists. Technically, get-out-of-jail-free cards have been issued for journalists and academics, both of which have a well-defined public interest in writing about and analyzing such documents. However, under the current climate it's inevitable that those with good reasons for possessing jihadi electronic documents will find themselves in anti-terror cross-hairs.
The paradox in this case is that the source of the so-called al Qaeda manual. According to UK reports, Sabir downloaded it from the US government.
Readers may already know that when someone cites a document attributed to al Qaeda, it's time to squint and look closely. Because one either won't be getting the entire picture, or its historical context and provenance will be distorted in some interesting but painful and politically expedient manner.
The "al Qaeda manual" was posted to the US Department of Justice website years ago.* It is more accurately known as the "Manual of Afghan Jihad" or "Military Studies in the Jihad [Holy War] Against the Tyrants." (Or simply the Manchester manual, from its place of confiscation.)
You can think of it as a mouldy oldy, dragged out and banged about to shake loose a dust of fear when counter-terror men need some to sprinkle on the polity.
The "Manual of Afghan Jihad" was obtained in Manchester in April 2000 by British anti-terrorism agents and subsequently turned over to the FBI's Nanette Schumaker later that month. It was originally the property of Nazib al Raghie, also known as Anas Al Liby to the US government. Al Raghie was the equivalent of an old pensioner from the Afghan war living in retirement in Britain. At the time the manual was confiscated during a counter-terror recce operation, UK authorities were not interested in him. Neither, apparently, was the FBI and he was not arrested. Not unexpectedly, he then disappeared.
Translations of it have been copied onto the web but at least two (and possibly more) primary sources for it lie within the jurisdiction of the US government, one on a Dept of Justice server and another at the Air Force's Air University. Since they're officially sanctioned sites, they are seen as legitimate sources by those who would study it, as well as attracting the simply curious.
* The US DoJ originals of the manual, edited, are split into four parts, part one; part two; part three; part four. The Air University mirror, cited by the White House, hosts it
During the London ricin trial, the defense considered the American government's description of it as "the al Qaeda manual" a manufactured title. Nowhere within the document is al Qaeda mentioned and it seems to have originated in the last years of the Islamist resistance of the Soviet occupation in Afghanistan. But from time to time the Manchester manual has been used by the US government to make political points.
In 2006, George W. Bush used it to remind Americans the country was at war against a potent enemy.
"Bin laden and his terrorist allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them," the president said to the Military Officers Association of America during a speech which was widely publicized. "The question is `Will we listen? Will we pay attention to what these evil men say?'"
The president cited the Manchester manual, calling it "al Qaeda's" - and a grisly example of the organization's methods, specifically pointing to the chapter entitled "Guideline for Beating and Killing Hostages."
As part of Bush's exposition on terror and why we fight, whitehouse.gov linked to a display page for the manual at the Air University, Maxwell-Gunter Air Force Base in Alabama. This page was a mirror of the John Ashcroft Department of Justice's old placeholder on the book, one which had been taken down although copies of the material still reside on its machine. (These versions were selectively edited by the American government, for example, to remove poison-making recipes thought to be a public menace.)
At Nottingham University, the document has come almost full circle - from Manchester, to Washington, around the US and back to England.
The Times Higher Education Supplement reported on May 22 that Sabir was using the manual "as preparation for a PhD on radical Islamic groups [and] had downloaded an edited version of the al-Qaeda handbook from a US government website... It is understood that [he] sent the 1,500-page document to the staff member... because he had access to a printer." The clerk was also arrested.
Sabir's lawyer told the publication "The two members of the university were treated as though they were part of an al-Qaeda cell."
University faculty and students have subsequently responded with great alarm, viewing it as an attack on academic freedoms. However, the protest was complicated by the intervention of an unnamed university official acting as spokesman, who explained to the press that there was "no reasonable rationale" for the clerk to have the manual. According to THES, "the edited version of the al-Qaeda handbook was 'not legitimate research material' in the university'’s view."
Many others differed, arguing it is obviously politically and socially relevant material to study. Indeed it is, not only as a collection of terror methods, some of them collected from the American neo-Nazi and survivalist right, but also as a book which has been cited in courts and used by authorities to publicly shape opinion in the war on terror. For example, in 2007 the US government attempted to use it to burnish its case against convicted terrorist Jose Padilla. It was declared inadmissible in that instance, although Padilla was eventually sent over, anyway.
Since the manual has been widely cited and distributed by the mainstream media, too, one could devote an entire scholarly essay to its socio-political utility in framing the nature of the adversary. And, as a matter of fact, Associated Press reported on May 28 that Sabir was using it in "writing on the American approach to al-Qaeda in Iraq."
This story is made more complicated as readers begin to understand that anyone deported to a country like Algeria, fitted with a jacket now defining them as an owner of the manual, has their life completely uprooted. Daubed with a black mark by it, they're set up as a potential target for arrest, subsequent interrogation and all that menacingly entails.
Bootnote: For the purpose of understanding the trail of the Manchester manual, it is proper to include its position on US government servers. Keep in mind that if you are in the United Kingdom and you're the wrong person, downloading it to your computer incurs a significant legal exposure from which bad things may transpire. ®
George Smith is a senior fellow at GlobalSecurity.org, a defense affairs think tank and public information group. At Dick Destiny, he blogs his way through chemical, biological, and nuclear terror hysteria, often by way of the contents of neighbourhood hardware stores
|
Where there is the necessary technical skill to move mountains, there is no need for the faith that moves mountains -anon-
|
|
|
Fritz
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1746
Reputation: 8.85
Rate Fritz
|
|
Don't wear cartoon t-shirts on airplanes.
« Reply #9 on: 2008-06-03 14:52:20 » |
|
So, if Transformer cartoons offend people and the airlines are going to block all offensive clothing, I you can see where this could lead to all kinds of fun.
Hope they don't start checking underwear .....
Cheers
Fritz
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7431640.stm
Gun T-shirt 'was a security risk'
A man wearing a T-shirt depicting a cartoon character holding a gun was stopped from boarding a flight by the security at Heathrow's Terminal 5.
Brad Jayakody, from Bayswater, central London, said he was "stumped" at the objection to his Transformers T-shirt.
Mr Jayakody said he had to change before boarding as security officers objected to the gun, held by the cartoon character.
Airport operator BAA said it was investigating the incident.
Mr Jayakody said the incident happened a few weeks ago, when he was challenged by an official during a pre-flight security check.
I was just looking for someone with a bit of common sense
Brad Jayakody
"He says, 'we won't be able to let you through because your T-shirt has got a gun on it'," Mr Jayakody said.
"I was like, 'What are you talking about?'.
"[The official's] supervisor comes over and goes 'sorry we can't let you through and you've a gun on your T-shirt'," he said.
Mr Jayakody said he had to strip and change his T-shirt there before he was allowed to board his flight.
"I was just looking for someone with a bit of common sense," he said.
"It's a cartoon robot - what threat is it to security or offensive to anyone at all?"
A BAA spokesman said there was no record of the incident and no "formal complaint" had been made.
"If a T-shirt had a rude word or a bomb on it, for example, a passenger may be asked to remove it," he said.
"We are investigating what happened to see if it came under this category.
"If it's offensive, we don't want other passengers upset."
|
Where there is the necessary technical skill to move mountains, there is no need for the faith that moves mountains -anon-
|
|
|
Hermit
Archon
Posts: 4287
Reputation: 8.94
Rate Hermit
Prime example of a practically perfect person
|
|
Re:London cops declare war on photography
« Reply #10 on: 2008-06-03 21:00:49 » |
|
At least in the UK he didn't have bunches of police armed with machineguns threatening to shoot him as happened to Star Simpson*... and given she accepted a plea deal to a misdemeanor when the prosecutors accepted they couldn't even prosecute her for possession of an hoax device, after many idiots asserted that she deserved to be shot, this indicates that the US public consider a death sentence for those accused of a misdemeanor acceptable. Once can only shake one's head that the idea that people with knowledge, people with skills, people who are involved with dangerous and hazardous substances - like batteries and wires - or wear pictures of them should be shot or stripped depending on which side of the Atlantic they are spotted. Of course, given that Americans tend to be portly, being forced to strip might be regarded as being a fate worse than being shot.
Meanwhile, given that the UK seems to lag the US in these issues, but not by much, perhaps we should be waiting for hundreds of people in the UK to be separated from their children, while the most intrusive possible searches (DNA tests) are performed against them, on zero evidence of even an unreasonable suspicion of a crime. If it happens, while the famed British "rights" probably won't help any, it will be interesting to see if the Euro privacy laws are any more effective than the now defunct US constitution.
Kind Regards
Hermit
*http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/06/03/mit_student_apologizes_for_shirt_that_led_to_logan_disturbance/
|
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
|
|
|
Fritz
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1746
Reputation: 8.85
Rate Fritz
|
|
Will size matter ? or How to recruit Airport Security
« Reply #11 on: 2008-06-07 02:27:00 » |
|
Quote:| [Hermit]<snip>given that Americans tend to be portly, being forced to strip might be regarded as being a fate worse than being shot.<snip> |
[Fritz]Looks like they got this taking the cloths off thing licked.
All those years of x-ray glasses in the back of comic books .... so it's going to be "scan'em, shoot'em and bag'em".
Looks like you call it, we got the EU kids beat again ... I wonder if this would have helped us stop the IRAQs smuggling all those WMD out of the country before we got there.
Cheers
Fritz
PS: My last pass through Germany's Frankfurt Airport was constantly punctuated by numerous official looking types with automatic weapons slung over their shoulders and I did seem to notice some safety latches and they were not all in the same position .... pre911 to boot .... toy gun toting might have ended badly back then already, but most likely no EUers cheering it on.
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20080606/a_bodyscan06.art.htm
10 airports install body scanners
Devices can peer under passengers' clothes
By Thomas Frank
USA TODAY
BALTIMORE — Body-scanning machines that show images of people underneath their clothing are being installed in 10 of the nation's busiest airports in one of the biggest public uses of security devices that reveal intimate body parts.
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) recently started using body scans on randomly chosen passengers in Los Angeles, Baltimore, Denver, Albuquerque and at New York's Kennedy airport.
Airports in Dallas, Detroit, Las Vegas and Miami will be added this month. Reagan National Airport in Washington starts using a body scanner today. A total of 38 machines will be in use within weeks.
"It's the wave of the future," said James Schear, the TSA security director at Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport, where two body scanners are in use at one checkpoint.
Schear said the scanners could eventually replace metal detectors at the nation's 2,000 airport checkpoints and the pat-downs done on passengers who need extra screening. "We're just scratching the surface of what we can do with whole-body imaging," Schear said.
The TSA effort could encourage scanners' use in rail stations, arenas and office buildings, the American Civil Liberties Union said. "This may well set a precedent that others will follow," said Barry Steinhardt, head of the ACLU technology project.
Scanners are used in a few courthouses, jails and U.S. embassies, as well as overseas border crossings, military checkpoints and some foreign airports such as Amsterdam's Schiphol.
The scanners bounce harmless "millimeter waves" off passengers who are selected to stand inside a portal with arms raised after clearing the metal detector. A TSA screener in a nearby room views the black-and-white image and looks for objects on a screen that are shaded differently from the body. Finding a suspicious object, a screener radios a colleague at the checkpoint to search the passenger.
The TSA says it protects privacy by blurring passengers' faces and deleting images right after viewing. Yet the images are detailed, clearly showing a person's gender. "You can actually see the sweat on someone's back," Schear said.
The scanners aim to strengthen airport security by spotting plastic and ceramic weapons and explosives that evade metal detectors and are the biggest threat to aviation. Government audits have found that screeners miss a large number of weapons, bombs and bomb parts such as wires and timers that agents sneak through checkpoints.
"I'm delighted by this development," said Clark Kent Ervin, the former Homeland Security inspector general whose reports urged the use of body scanners. "This really is the ultimate answer to increasing screeners' ability to spot concealed weapons."
The scanners do a good job seeing under clothing but cannot see through plastic or rubber materials that resemble skin, said Peter Siegel, a senior scientist at the California Institute of Technology.
"You probably could find very common materials that you could wrap around you that would effectively obscure things," Siegel said.
Passengers who went through a scanner at the Baltimore airport last week were intrigued, reassured and occasionally wary. The process took about 30 seconds on average.
Stepping into the 9-foot-tall glass booth, Eileen Reardon of Baltimore looked startled when an electronic glass door slid around the outside of the machine to create the image of her body. "Some of this stuff seems a little crazy," Reardon said, "but in this day and age, you have to go along with it."
Scott Shafer of Phoenix didn't mind a screener looking at him underneath his shorts and polo shirt from a nearby room. The door is kept shut and blocked with floor screens. "I don't know that person back there. I'll never seem them," Shafer said. "Everything personal is taken out of the equation."
Steinhardt of the ACLU said passengers would be alarmed if they saw the image of their body. "It all seems very clinical and non-threatening — you go through this portal and don't have any idea what's at the other end," he said.
Passengers scanned in Baltimore said they did not know what the scanner did and were not told why they were directed into the booth.
Magazine-size signs are posted around the checkpoint explaining the scanners, but passengers said they did not notice them.
Darin Scott of Miami was annoyed by the process.
"If you don't ask questions, they don't tell you anything," Scott said. When he asked a screener technical questions about the scanner, "he could not answer," Scott said.
TSA spokeswoman Sterling Payne said the agency is studying passenger reaction and could "get more creative" about informing passengers. "If passengers have questions," she said, "they need to ask the questions."
Passengers can decline to go through a scanner, but they will face a pat-down.
Schear, the Baltimore security director, said only 4% of passengers decline.
In Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, where scanners have been tested since last year as an alternative to pat-downs, 90% of passengers choose to be scanned, the TSA says.
"Most passengers don't think it's any big deal," Schear said. "They think it's a piece of security they're willing to do."
|
Where there is the necessary technical skill to move mountains, there is no need for the faith that moves mountains -anon-
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.91
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
Re:Will size matter ? or How to recruit Airport Security
« Reply #12 on: 2008-06-07 04:41:04 » |
|
Quote from: Fritz on 2008-06-07 02:27:00 | "We're just scratching the surface of what we can do with whole-body imaging," Schear said. |
[Blunderov] <tears of mirth streaming freely> Oh deary me ! You can't write stuff like this. (I had begun to wonder if this wasn't something from The Onion.) Oh the prurience*! Oh the humanity!
*pruritus - an intense itching sensation that can have various causes (as by allergies or infection or lymphoma or jaundice etc.)
|
|
|
|
|
Fritz
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1746
Reputation: 8.85
Rate Fritz
|
|
Re:London cops declare war on photography
« Reply #13 on: 2008-06-07 13:39:36 » |
|
Quote:| [Blunderov] <tears of mirth streaming freely> Oh deary me ! You can't write stuff like this. (I had begun to wonder if this wasn't something from The Onion.) Oh the prurience*! Oh the humanity |
[Fritz]You wouldn't perchance be mocking a renown news source like 'USATODAY' would you ?  ...
For the record to clear my name and dignity, I got to that story through:
http://www.disinfo.com/content/
Cheers
Fritz
|
Where there is the necessary technical skill to move mountains, there is no need for the faith that moves mountains -anon-
|
|
|
Fritz
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1746
Reputation: 8.85
Rate Fritz
|
|
Another police website hacked
« Reply #14 on: 2008-06-10 18:46:06 » |
|
[blunderov]
[Fritz]Looks like payback has found it's fickle hand ......
Cheers
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/10/police_website_hacked/
Another police website hacked
First the Home Office, now local plods
By John Ozimek → More by this author
Published Tuesday 10th June 2008 14:40 GMT
This is starting to get a little tedious. The Bedfordshire Police website has just been taken down after it was discovered that every page had been replaced by an animated man carrying a Tunisian flag. Underneath, according to the BBC, was a green symbol and a Muslim prayer written in Arabic. Don’t bother clicking on the link: as at mid-day, it is still not back up.
However, if you would like to see what Bedfordshire Police WERE saying until they were so rudely interrupted, you could try the Google cache version.
Here you can read the answer to such vital questions as “Is Your Computer Safe Online?”, which warns rather ironically: “Hackers can get in, take what they want, and even leave open a ‘back door’ so they can access your computer anytime you're online and use it to attack other computers.”
Moreover, “Every minute that your computer is connected to the Internet, it is at risk”. What a shame that Beds Police don’t appear to have read their own website. Particularly the bit that starts: “Where Can I Get A Personal Firewall?”
OK. Now that we’ve all had a good giggle, here’s the serious stuff.
Last week, the Home Office Crime Reduction Unit was itself subject to a similar hack. In that instance, one of its pages was replaced with a page that mimicked that belonging to the Italian Post Office – and for 12 hours phished happily away before anyone at the Home Office spotted what was going on.
Are you the owner of this data, sir?
This sort of incident is bad news for Government plans to centralise data in two ways. First – whatever the experts say – it is demonstrable proof that data may well NOT be safe in government hands.
Second, when the technological explanation appears and we are assured that whilst the website was hacked, no-one could possibly have wormed their way through to anything more sensitive, there is a credibility gap. One of the biggest obstacles to data centralisation is public confidence. This destroys it.
In response to the CRU incident, the Home Office is keen to point out that “at no point was there a risk to any personal or security information held on Home Office IT systems”. This was a hack that effectively “skimmed the surface” of the website, without connecting with any deeper database functionality.
The Home Office bods “take information very seriously”. This incident will now be included in a review of the security of its websites, undertaken by the Independent Reviewer of Information Assurance, and due to report back in Spring 2009.
On the question of how this affected public confidence in respect of the National Identity Scheme, they were less reassuring. “By linking fingerprints to a secure database with strict rules outlining its use, the National Identity Scheme will allow individuals, business, and the state to prove identity more securely, conveniently and efficiently while protecting personal information from abuse”.
This rather misses the point that if the public perceive something to be unsafe, it doesn’t matter how safe it actually is. Bedfordshire Police take a similar tack. According to a spokeswoman, "The website is hosted externally, away from all other police systems so no personal or confidential data could have been obtained.
"Bedfordshire Police take security extremely seriously, which is why the website is hosted independently and outside all other IT systems."
In 2007, Bedfordshire Police were one of ten Police Forces in the UK to sign up to pilot the “Lantern” project – allowing them to carry out hand-held, mobile fingerprinting. That means key biometric data, of the type likely to be used to underpin any future biometric identity scheme is wandering the streets in the hands of a police force that can’t even protect its own website!
Are you re-assured?
Those who’d like to know more about how to hack the police (and other websites) could do worse than take a peek here. This Youtube channel offers a fascinating range of insights into how to carry out hacks. It also claims to be maintained by Arfaoui FirA, which is, co-incidentally, the same name as that used by the perpetrator of the Beds Police outrage. Is it him? Is it all some sort of cunning double bluff? Make your own mind up – but best to do so quickly, as we guess this site won’t stay up for that much longer. ®
|
Where there is the necessary technical skill to move mountains, there is no need for the faith that moves mountains -anon-
|
|
|
|
Logged
