I think the sexual predators have more to fear of the MySpace generation of kids than vice versa these days.
Boys’ MySpace prank results in sex crime arrest
Man allegedly tried to meet fictitious 15-year-old girl for sex
Tags: sex
Categories
Categories
Panorama: Stockwell shooting
The BBC showed tonight a Panorama documentary presented by Peter Taylor about the events of July 22nd 2005 that saw the killing of the Brazilian electrician Jean Charles De Menezes by firearms officers of the Metropolitan Police force.
No new evidence was revealed but it was good to have all the little bits of information that have leaked slowly out about the operation presented together as a whole here.
I think the most striking thing was that in contrast to the Israeli policy concerning suicide bombers where the bomb or suicide belt must be seen before the order to shoot to kill is given there is no such need contained within the Operation Kratos guidelines.
Officers operating under the Kratos guidelines must be sure that such a device is present but need not actually see it.
Also the Designated Senior Officer must give the order to fire but the firearms officers radios could not communicate with the command center as they were underground. Therefore the order was not given by the DSO immediately prior to the shooting, it was either given at a time before the officers had entered the underground station or was not given at all.
There was also in the programme the slightly bizarre denial that there was a shoot-to-kill policy to deal with suicide bombers but admission that the policy was to shoot at the head in order to cause immediate incapacity of the bomber. Now I’m sure there is a very slim chance that a person could survive being shot in the head to the extent that they have become incapacitated. So whilst strictly speaking the purpose isn’t to kill it will in all but the very rarest of circumstances actually result in the killing of the bomber.
The Guardian: Surveillance on drivers may be increased
The case for cameras to be focused on people using mobiles as they drive is made by the independent adviser to the transport select committee, Robert Gifford, of the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety (Pacts).
He argues that automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) technology should be applied in new ways to help defray costs of cameras and to catch offenders. “One of the good things about ANPR is that people are often multiple offenders so it would provide useful intelligence,” he said. “Those responsible for 7/7 got to Luton station by car.”
My god why is it necessary to mention terrorists or terrorism every time there is mention of new applications of surveillance technologies. Mr Gifford seems to mention it as an aside but the implication is that perhaps 7/7 could have been prevented if the system was in operation at the time. It’s like he feels the need to justify the use of surveillance by using our greatest fears. But why should that surprise me it is what has become almost a standard line by government spokesmen so why not independent advisors also.
Mr Gifford said expanding the use of technology for tracking the movements of cars could lead police to people who had committed other offences in the same way that Al Capone was eventually caught through his income tax evasion. He claimed that for greater safety and “the greater good of society”, most people would be prepared to accept “a slight reduction of our liberty”.
Interesting that the public don’t actually get to say whether they wish to give up some liberty in order for the greater good of society.
In any case as Marcel Berlins writes it’s not a civil liberties issue.
Currently being floated in parliament is a proposal for more road surveillance cameras, partly to catch out motorists who use mobile phones while driving. I have seen several accidents caused by chatting drivers; someone I knew quite well was killed because she was talking and driving at the same time. I would have expected the proposal, aimed at deterring dangerous conduct and thereby reducing accidents and saving lives, to be greeted with enthusiasm. But no.
The whingers have emerged. It would cost too much; the technology isn’t good enough; it won’t prevent accidents; it’s a cynical scheme to make money by fining the poor put-upon British motorist; Britain has become the most watched country in the world. To the last of those ill-founded objections I say, “So what?” I don’t care how many cameras we have on the roads, provided they are used for the public good, which, to my mind, includes catching dangerous drivers and lowering fatalities. This is not a civil liberties issue.
If this technology leads to prosecutions of people like Donna Marie Maddock who was caught on camera driving whilst using both hands to apply makeup then it surely is a good thing.
But I think Mr. Berlins is mistaken in believing that the issue of whether the technology will work is irrelevant.
It’s pointless to expand the system to catch people talking on mobile phones or applying makeup if the technology isn’t good enough to distinguish between those behaviours and innocent actions such as scratching one’s ear or sneezing or something equally innocuous. I don’t know what the true case is but you wouldn’t use speed cameras if the technology was unable to tell if a car was travelling at a legal speed of 56 MPH and an illegal 72 MPH so it clearly is an issue that needs to be at least considered before implementation.
Also it would seem to me that if every single motor vehicle is scanned by the ANPR then there may be a civil liberties issue here as well depending on what is done with the data. I wrote briefly last year in a much longer post about the use of ANPR in Bath following this article in The Bath Chronicle: Cameras scan for criminals.
It’s fine if my number plate is scanned, checked against the database of offenders and then discarded but if my travel into Bath is logged then eventually the police will have built up a log of my movements into and out of the city along with every other drivers’.
Tags: liberty, surveillance, terrorism
Categories
Minor ID card victory
Government plans to make all passport applicants also have an ID card have been defeated in the Lords reports the BBC.
Tags: ID cards
Categories
This bike is a pipe bomb
Washington Post: Bike Band Sticker Causes Bomb Scare
ATHENS, Ohio — A sticker on a bicycle that said “this bike is a pipe bomb” caused a scare Thursday at Ohio University that shut down four buildings before authorities learned the message was the name of a punk rock band, a university spokesman said.
How moronic is this? What stupid terrorist would label their bike as containing a pipe-bomb if it really did contain one?
The bomb experts hit the bike with a high-pressure spray of water, then pried it apart with a hydraulic device normally used to rescue accident victims trapped in cars, acting Athens Fire Chief Ken Gilbraith said. Once they had it open, they saw there was no bomb.
Poor bastard learns his lesson the hard way don’t stick stickers on your bike that contains statements that could be misconstrued by moronic figures in authority or else you’ll have your bike dismantled by heavy machinery.
Dean of Students Terry Hogan urged students to be more careful when showing support for the band from Pensacola, Fla.
A Wichita State University study has concluded that despite fears of internet crime most people are still creating insecure passwords for their online accounts even though they know better. [Via Bruce Schneier]
Tags: computer security, passwords, security
I saw Syriana today and I’d have to agree with every single point that my friend Abhi made about it. He wrote:
Syriana is a brilliant film. Deeply flawed in some ways (packs in too much material and some characterization suffers as a result, as does the film’s lucidity) but the strengths render these quite irrelevant IMHO. There are some brilliant performances (Clooney is sublime, even with limited screen time) and the screenplay is ambitious as all hell. Its about time a movie like this came along. Its scathing and realistic and unabashedly political and pulls no punches. Also features one of the more stomach churning torture scenes I have seen.
The issues of corruption and US foreign policy influencing domestic policies in Middle Eastern states is a complex one and too much to fit into a movie of this length but I think it managed very well to cover all it’s bases even if that meant that the pacing was off at times and characterisations were broad strokes for many characters.
I think the message is more than just that oil companies act reprehensibly. Of course they do they are large multinational companies they’ll do whatever turns a profit and to do that as an oil company means corrupting or influencing governments. The message also is that our governments let them behave this way because it is believed it is in the best interests of our nations (both the US and the UK) for them to do so. This is kind of paralleled with the movie The Constant Gardener but in that it is pharmaceutical companies.
Not really news as the truth did come out following the event but Fox News now has video footage that shows President Bush was warned of the potential impact of Hurricane Katrina.
In dramatic and sometimes agonizing terms, federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees, put lives at risk in New Orleans’ Superdome and overwhelm rescuers, according to confidential video footage.
Bush didn’t ask a single question during the final briefing before Katrina struck on Aug. 29, but he assured soon-to-be-battered state officials: “We are fully prepared.”
The possibility that the levees might be ‘topped’ was a grave concern at the meeting and yet the President was to state categorically after the hurricane had hit New Orleans that no one could have predicted that the levees would be breached.
Spy Blog has an excellent analysis of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill or as it otherwise has been described as The Abolition of Parliament Bill.
Cabinet Office Minister Jim Murphy has published the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill 2006 looks to be another sneaky attempt by the Executive branch of Government to further weaken the role of Parliament.
Why does the NuLabour Government hate the idea of full public consultation and of detailed scrutiny by Parliament so much ?
This Bill adds to the already strong case for a law which imposes criminal penalties on any Government Ministers, civil servants and lawyers, who dare to use words like “any” or “all” or “every” in a Bill or Order or Regulation, without qualification, caveat or restriction of unlimited powers.
Similarly, by law, no Act of Parliament should ever be worded so that it could be interpreted to give the power to amend itself (not the same thing as normal Secondary Legislation), without new Primary Legislation and full, detailed scrutiny by Parliament.
This Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill fails these simple constitutional safeguards.
Murky.org also makes some great points in his summing up of The Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill
Tags: politics, totalitarianism
Most people who use e-mail now know enough to be on guard against “phishing” messages that pretend to be from a bank or business but are actually attempts to steal passwords and other personal information. But there is evidence that among global cybercriminals, phishing may already be passé.
read more | digg story
Tags: computer security, Digg, security