The Nether-World

Free Burma

2007-10-04T03:32:00.000+01:00

Click on the banner to learn more. Oh, and there is this (via Justin):

MARCH FOR BURMA
GLOBAL DAY OF ACTION

SATURDAY 6th OCTOBER 2007

Join us for a march and rally in solidarity with the monks and peaceful demonstrators in Burma and demand international action.

Assemble at Tate Britain, SW1P 4RG at 11.00am
Nearest tube Pimlico

March to Trafalgar Square for a rally at 12.45pm

For more information visit www.burmacampaign.org.uk, call 020 7324 4710 or email demo@burmacampaign.org.uk or call Crisis Action on 020 7324 4752/4758

Organisations supporting this march include: Amnesty International, Avaaz, British Muslim Forum, Burma Campaign UK, BDMA UK, Christian Solidarity Worldwide, Crescent Network UK, Federation of Student Islamic Societies, GMB,GNNSJ UK, Hindu Council UK, Human Rights Watch, Muslim Council of Britain, NUS, Prospect, Sikh Aid, Sufi Muslim Council, ‘Support the Monks in Burma’ (Facebook), TUC, United Nations Association of the UK, Unison, Unite the Union, Waging Peace.

For the latest news on the situation in Burma I urge you to read the excellent series of posts by Ten Percent.

Tags: Freedom, Burma, Myanmar, Protest, Democracy

Alisher 'Capone' Usmanov And The Continuing Campaign

2007-09-28T13:40:00.000+01:00

Let's start by linking once again to the post which started this story and remind ourselves that there has been no legal procedure, so Craig Murray's allegations are nothing more than that (just as Alisher Usmanov's allegations that he's been libeled are simply allegations). I don't have much in the way of new information on the Alisher Usmanov affair at the moment. For the latest news the best place to go is Tim Ireland's interim blog which is dedicated to the matter.

Tim and Clive have been trying to get hold of the correspondence between Fasthosts and Schillings which led to the plug being pulled on their stable of websites. Both companies have ignored the requests. Tim is now looking for summaries of this story so if you can reduce this saga to about 200 words, do let him know. The campaign by bloggers to protect freedom of speech from the likes of Usmanov and his shysters has now reached as far as Japan (via Postman Patel). Anyway, while we await further developments, I thought I'd play with Photoshop some more.

Click to enlarge

The resemblance between Alisher Usmanov and Al Capone is striking don't ya think?

My previous posts on this issue can be found here. More and more people are posting and re-posting on this story and the cross-spectrum support really is unprecedented. Let's keep the momentum going. Justin has done an excellent job of collecting the links to the Usmanov affair but now the updated list of supporters has moved over to Bloggerheads so if you do post something on it, let Tim or Aaron Heath (tyger AT tygerland DOT net) know and be added to the list which is now over 300 strong. Don't worry about arriving late for the party, this thing is far from over and the more the merrier.

Tags: Freedom of Speech, Islom Karimov, Alisher Usmanov, Blogging, Arsenal

The Crisis In Burma

2007-09-27T08:58:00.000+01:00

I was going to write a long link-laden piece about the situation in Burma but I don't think it's really necessary. You'd have to be from another planet to not know what's going on over there and I doubt I could add much more to the excellent series of posts by Ten Percent and Mask of Anarchy who have covered this crisis comprehensively. I urge you to read them and also the information in the useful set of links compiled by Mr Eugenides.

I've been watching the events unfolding in Burma with a growing sense of alarm. It was apparently too much to hope for that the peaceful protests led by the monks would not be put down with the brutality we've come to expect from the thuggish Junta running that country. The people of Burma (Myanmar is the name given to the country by the Junta) have been crying out for democracy for years (silently because of the awful repression) and have largely been ignored. All they ask is that the West stops investing in the corrupt regime and applies strong diplomatic pressure to secure change, something that so far hasn't really happened. The pathetic hand wringing and rhetoric we've heard from the UN and the EU is just that. We can be grateful, however, that the media is reporting reasonably well on the crisis and Burma is now getting the attention it deserves. But the momentum has to be kept up otherwise some other crisis will push Burma down the news agenda and an opportunity to achieve a relatively peaceful regime change will have been lost.

Of course there isn't that much we can do other than to pressure our leaders to isolate the regime and to force the companies investing in Burma to stop. Another (admittedly very small) thing we can do is to sign this petition to Chinese President Hu Jintao and the UN Security Council and get others to do so.

To Chinese President Hu Jintao and the UN Security Council: We stand alongside the citizens of Burma in their peaceful protests. We urge you to oppose a violent crackdown on the demonstrators, and to support genuine reconciliation and democracy in Burma. We pledge to hold you accountable for any further bloodshed.

China is an ally of Burma and both countries have atrocious human rights records. China, however is in a difficult position. Because of the Olympic Games soon to be hosted in Beijing, the country is trying to buff up its international image and supporting a violent crack down on peaceful protesters isn't going to help. China is also keen to be seen as a major player on the world stage and is even sending peace-keepers to Darfur. India too has a role to play in resolving this crisis as does Russia. Both China and Russia are, at the moment opposing meaningful sanctions.

Even president Bush now seems to be belatedly taking the matter a bit more seriously (though he needs to go much further) and Gordon Brown is also calling for tougher sanctions but we've heard Gordon wax lyrical about Burma before without any noticeable effect.

There has been some debate recently about the amount of investment British companies have in Burma. The Foreign Office denies that Britain is the second biggest investor in the country.

Contrary to some reports, the UK is not the second largest investor in Burma. The State Peace and Development Council’s investment records are far from transparent, but we believe the figure they quote for the UK is cumulative, and includes investments by companies such as Premier Oil and British American Tobacco who have since withdrawn. It also includes investments that were agreed but never occurred. The DTI figures for current active UK investment are very low. For example in 2003, the DTI recorded UK foreign direct investment flows into Burma as negligible (i.e. between £0 and £500,000).

This statement is however, misleading as there are British companies abroad trading with Burma. From the Burma Campaign UK (a good source for the latest news) there is a long list of companies (some British) which support the military regime. Among them are:

Abercrombie & Kent
Chevron
Rolls-Royce
Siemens
Suzuki
Total Oil

One thing we can do is to write to some of these companies and pressure them to stop supporting such a vile regime.

The protesters in Burma are showing incredible bravery by continuing with their peaceful protests despite the worsening violence inflicted on them by the authorities who are now launching raids on monasteries. They deserve whatever support we are able to give. This situation is urgent and could turn into a bloodbath very quickly.

*UPDATE*

Much of the news coming out of Burma has been because of bloggers or reporters using the internet. Now the Burmese junta is trying to cut off communications with the outside world by closing off internet access and telephone links. This is bad news and an ominous sign of things to come. So is this.

*UPDATE 2*

One of the monks holed up in a monastery surrounded by soldiers stated what the protesters are asking for. They want three steps to be taken:

The first step is to reduce all commodity prices, fuel prices, rice and cooking oil prices immediately.
The second step – release all political prisoners, including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and all detainees arrested during ongoing demonstrations over the fuel price hike.
The third step – enter a dialogue with pro-democracy forces for national reconciliation immediately, to resolve the crisis and difficulties facing and suffered by the people.

Not too unreasonable under the circumstances.

Tags: Freedom, Burma, Myanmar, Protest, Democracy

That Tom Wise Speech on Usmanov

2007-09-27T05:29:00.000+01:00

UKIP MEP Tom Wise did what other politicians should have done and didn't. I'm certainly no fan of UKIP but you have to give credit where it's due. By speaking out about the unsavoury Alisher Usmanov and his nefarious past during the Saryusz-Wolski report “Towards a common European foreign policy on energy”, Mr Wise managed to blow yet another gaping hole in the tactics used by Usmanov and his lawyers. This is what Shillings' intentions were:

Laura Tyler, of Schillings, said they did not intend to sue Murray directly because they did not want to give him a platform to express his views.

In other words they didn't want to go to court and risk Craig Murray's allegations being found to be correct so they managed to (temporarily) silence him without any legal process, merely by sending threatening letters to his web hosting company who duly pulled the plug (and in the process, took out numerous other websites, all except one of which had made no mention whatsoever of Usmanov). As we have seen, that tactic (predictably) exploded in their faces.

Tom Wise's short speech means that the allegations he made in the European Parliament can now be reported on (provided the MSM finds the courage to do so) as they are published under Parliamentary privilege. You can hear an MP3 of the speech by clicking on the button below (via Swiss Metablog).

Click To Play

And, courtesy of England Expects (via), we have a transcript:

When the EU talks of a 'Common Foreign Policy' on energy, you need to be aware of exactly who you propose to do business with.
President Putin is on record as saying "The Commission should be under no illusions, if it wants to buy Russian gas; it has to deal with the Russian state".
Gazprom is not a private company; it is a state controlled tool of Russian foreign policy.
It is, moreover, in the hands of Putin's political henchmen, and allegedly organised crime.
Take for example Alisher Usmanov. This gentleman, the son of a Communist apparatchik, is chairman of Gazprom Invest Holdings, the group that handles Gazprom's business activities outside Russia. He is the man you will be dealing with. He is the man who cuts off gas supplies if client states dare to question Gazprom's demands.
Allegedly a gangster and racketeer, he served a 6 year jail sentence in the Soviet Union in the 1980s, his eventual pardon coming at the behest of Uzbek mafia chief and heroin overlord Gafur Rakimov, described as Usmanov's "mentor".
Usmanov bought the newspaper 'Kommersant'. 3 months later, the journalist Ivan Safronov, a critic of the Putin regime who just weeks earlier had been "vigorously interrogated" by the FSB, as the KGB is now called, mysteriously fell to his death from his apartment window still clutching a bag of shopping.
According to Craig Murray, former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, it was Usmanov who ordered the cutting off of supplies to Georgia earlier this year. Please take note, Mr President, that the Kremlin has now refused to sanction the construction of a pipeline to the EU over Georgian territory.
These are the people you want to do business with. These are the people you are moulding your 'foreign policy on energy' around.
Mr Commissioner, good luck: You'll need it.

Marvellous stuff! Now what was that again about not wanting to give Craig Murray a platform to express his views Schillings?

More information about this story continues to emerge. Tim Ireland, now back on-line, has published a detailed timeline of the events leading up to, and following on from the closure of the websites which is well worth reading.

Tags: Freedom of Speech, Islom Karimov, Alisher Usmanov, Blogging, Arsenal

The Usmanov Affair: A Quick Update

2007-09-25T15:57:00.000+01:00

I'm still updating my original post but I thought this piece of information should have have its own post.

Tim Ireland is back blogging - not yet on his Bloggerheads site but on an interim site (hopefully Schillings-proof) set up to deal with this issue while the technical difficulties of getting Bloggerheads back on-line are resolved. This will obviously be a good source of information on the issue. Please spread the word and add this site to your blogroll: Bloggerheads: The Alisher Usmanov Affair. Thanks.

In other developments, the list of supporters is still growing fast. Among the latest links is a very good piece from Dan Hardie and another from Chris Applegate. Also The Committee To Protect Bloggers has an article. The mainstream media are still very slow on this story but The Register has covered it and Associated Press have too which might speed things up a bit.

I've just noticed that Bob Piper and Boris Johnson's sites have fallen off the net again. I hope this is just a temporary glitch. If anyone has any further information as to what happened or sees these blogs on-line again, please let me know in the comments.

*UPDATE*

I've just heard from Tim that the disappearance of Bob Piper and Boris Johnson's blogs is due to server demand...Phew!

Tags: Freedom of Speech, Islom Karimov, Alisher Usmanov, Blogging, Arsenal

Alisher Usmanov Bit Off More Than He Could Chew When He Tried To Censor Bloggers

2007-09-24T09:12:00.000+01:00

Mr Usmanov and his legal team's heavy-handed tactics against bloggers who dare to criticise him (first reported by Chicken Yoghurt) have backfired spectacularly. He must be feeling pretty sick now.

With sincere apologies to Monty Python

Meanwhile, with the absence of proper reporting by much of the Mainstream media (with a few exceptions), the blogging community is carrying the torch for the struggle to preserve freedom of speech in the UK.

Curious Hamster, Pickled Politics, Harry’s Place, Tim Worstall, Dizzy, Iain Dale, Ten Percent, Blairwatch, Earthquake Cove, Turbulent Cleric (who suggests dropping a line to the FA about Mr Usmanov), Mike Power, Jailhouse Lawyer, Suesam, Devil’s Kitchen, The Cartoonist, Falco, Casualty Monitor, Forever Expat, Arseblog, Drink-soaked Trots (and another), Pitch Invasion, Wonko’s World, Roll A Monkey, Caroline Hunt, Westminster Wisdom, Chris K, Anorak, Mediawatchwatch, Norfolk Blogger, Chris Paul, Indymedia (with a list of Craig Murray’s articles that are currently unavailable), Obsolete, Tom Watson, Cynical Chatter, Reactionary Snob, Mr Eugenides, Matthew Sinclair, The Select Society, Liberal England, Davblog, Peter Gasston Pitch Perfect, Adelaide Green Porridge Cafe, Lunartalks, Tygerland, The Crossed Pond, Our Kingdom, Big Daddy Merk, Daily Mail Watch, Graeme’s, Random Thoughts, Nosemonkey, Matt Wardman, Politics in the Zeros, Love and Garbage, The Huntsman, Conservative Party Reptile, Ellee Seymour, Sabretache, Not A Sheep, Bartholomew’s Notes on Religion, The People’s Republic Of Newport, Life, the Universe & Everything, Arsenal Transfer Rumour Mill, The Green Ribbon, Blood & Treasure, The Last Ditch, Areopagitica, Football in Finland, An Englishman’s Castle, Freeborn John, Eursoc, The Back Four, Rebellion Suck!, Ministry of Truth, ModernityBlog, Beau Bo D’Or, Scots and Independent, The Splund, Bill Cameron, Podnosh, Dodgeblogium, Moving Target, Serious Golmal, Goonerholic, The Spine, Zero Point Nine, Lenin’s Tomb, The Durruti Column, The Bristol Blogger, ArseNews, David Lindsay, Quaequam Blog!, On A Quiet Day…, Kathz’s Blog, England Expects, Theo Spark, Duncan Borrowman, Senn’s Blog, Katykins, Jewcy, Kevin Maguire, Stumbling and Mumbling, Famous for 15 megapixels, Ordovicius, Tom Morris, AOL Fanhouse, Doctor Vee, The Curmudgeonly, The Poor Mouth, 1820, Hangbitch, Crooked Timber, ArseNole, Identity Unknown, Liberty Alone, Amused Cynicism, Clairwil, The Lone Voice, Tampon Teabag, Unoriginalname38, Special/Blown It, The Remittance Man, 18 Doughty Street, Laban Tall, Martin Bright, Spy Blog The Exile, poons, Jangliss, Who Knows Where Thoughts Come From?, Imagined Community, A Pint of Unionist Lite, Poldraw, Disillusioned And Bored, Error Gorilla, Indigo Jo, Swiss Metablog, Kate Garnwen Truemors, Asn14, D-Notice, The Judge, Political Penguin, Miserable Old Fart, Jottings, fridgemagnet, Blah Blah Flowers, J. Arthur MacNumpty, Tony Hatfield, Grendel, Charlie Whitaker, Matt Buck, The Waendel Journal, Marginalized Action Dinosaur, SoccerLens, Toblog, John Brissenden East Lower, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Peter Black AM, Boing Boing, BLTP, Gunnerblog, LFB UK, Liberal Revolution, Wombles, Focus on Sodbury…, Follow The Money, Freedom and Whisky, Melting Man, PoliticalHackUK, Simon Says…, Daily EM, From The Barrel of a Gun, The Fourth Place, The Armchair News Blog, Journalist und Optimist, Bristol Indymedia, Dave Weeden, Up North John, Gizmonaut, Spin and Spinners, Marginalia, Arnique, Heather Yaxley, The Whiskey Priest, On The Beat, Paul Canning, Martin Stabe, Mat Bowles, Pigdogfucker, Rachel North, B3TA board, Naqniq, Yorkshire Ranter, The Home Of Football, UFO Breakfast Recipients, Moninski , Kerching, e-clectig, Mediocracy, Sicily Scene, Samizdata, I blog, they blog, weblog, Colcam, Some Random Thoughts, Bel is thinking, Vino S, Simply Jews, Atlantic Free Press, Registan, Filasteen, Britblog Roundup #136, Scientific Misconduct Blog, Adam Bowie, Duncan at Abcol, Camera Anguish, A Very British Dude, Whatever, Central News, Green Gathering, Leighton Cooke, Skuds’ Sister’s Brother, Contrast News, Poliblog Perspective, Parish Pump, El Gales, Noodle, Curly’s Corner Shop, Freunde der offenen Gesellschaft, otromundoesposible, Richard Stacy, Looking For A Voice, News Dissector, Kateshomeblog, Writes Like She Talks, Extra! Extra!, Committee To Protect Bloggers, Liberty’s Requiem, American Samizdat, The Thunder Dragon, Cybersoc, Achievable Life, Paperholic, Creative-i, Raedwald, Nobody’s Friend, Lobster Blogster, Panchromatica, Boriswatch, Bloggerheads: The Alisher Usmanov Affair, Dan Hardie, Chris Applegate, Committee To Protect Bloggers, William Bowles, Christopher Glamorgan, Spreeblick, Krusenstern, Skuds' Sister's Brother, Contrast News, Moon of Alabama, Back off, man…, Brendadada, Freace, Fork Handles, West Virginia Rebel’s Blog, Instapundit, Powerpymes, iDiligence Forum, Gizmotastic, Demos, Gary Andrews, Neweurasia , Never Trust a Hippy, sub specie aeternitatis, Bananas in the Falklands, The Sharpener, Virtual Light, Stu News, Scraps of Moscow, Danivon, As A Dodo, La Russophobe, PJC Journal, Mick Fealty’s Brassneck, dead brains don’t dance, A Comfortable Place, Bamblog, Robert Amsterdam, The Customer, No Longer at Ease, Rachel-Catherine, Humaniform, Mike Rouse, Chesus Yuste, anticapitalista (more than 292).

Tags: Freedom of Speech, Islom Karimov, Alisher Usmanov, Blogging, Arsenal

Bloggerheads And Other Top Blogs (Temporarily) Off-Line

2007-09-20T19:14:00.000+01:00

Note: This post is continually being updated. Please check back for updates.Image courtesy of Matt Buck under CC license

I am just returning from a blogging hiatus to help pass on this important message. The following is lifted from Chicken Yoghurt:

Public Service Announcement
Tim Ireland’s Bloggerheads site is currently down after his webhost pulled the plug. You can thank the latest Russian (that should be Uzbek) billionaire to reach the UK.
Read on

This doesn't just affect Tim but also a family of websites that he and Clive look after including:

This action has left Tim without email so Justin is offering to pass on any messages by phone (you can find his email on his website). Hopefully some of these sites will be back on-line soon (about 48 hours inshallah). Tim and Clive are searching for a new web host for their blogs. Please pass this message on if you have a blog. With the access these bloggers have to the mainstream media, I can't help thinking that the possible future owner of Arsenal football club has scored an own goal.

For some background into this episode check out Alisher Usmanov, the Uzbek oligarch who's trying to take control of Arsenal football club (warning: he and his team of shysters edit the Wikipedia entry). In the absence of the the aforementioned blogs, only Obsolete is left to give a clear picture of the slimeball behind this attack on freedom of speech. His posts on the subject can be found here, here and here. Suffice to say that Alisher Usmanov is close to Islom Karimov, the president of Uzbekistan (ally of the UK and USA) who gets his kicks from having his subjects raped with broken bottles or boiled to death. Given Alisher Usmanov and his legal team's enthusiasm for bullying anyone who has anything less than flattering to say about this wonderful person, I won't go into the allegations of criminality reported by sources far more reliable than Schillings. For now I'll just lament the apparent introduction of Uzbekistan's interpretation of the concept of freedom of speech here in the UK and wonder how this will affect a great British institution like Arsenal football club.

More bloggage on this from: Blairwatch, Curious Hamster, Ten Percent, Iain Dale, Pickled Politics, Arseblog, Devil's Kitchen, Pitch Invasion, Tim Worstall, Obsolete, Mediawatchwatch, Wonko's World, Mr Eugenides, Harry's Place, Dizzy Thinks, Cynical Chatter From The Underworld, Earthquake Cove, Turbulent Cleric, Mike Power, Jailhouse Lawyer, The Cartoonist, Falco, LFCM: Casualty Monitor (also here), Forever Expat, Drink-soaked Trots, Roll A Monkey, Caroline Hunt, Westminster Wisdom, Chris K, Anorak, Norfolk Blogger, Chris Paul, Indymedia, Tom Watson, Reactionary Snob, Daily Mail Watch, Our Kingdom-Open Democracy, The Crossed Pond, Tygerland, Lunartalks, Marginalized Action Dinosaur, Modernity Blog, Rebellion Sucks, All About Nothing, Adelaide Green Porridge Cafe, An Englishman's Castle, Samantha Gordon & Me, Ordovicius, England Expects, Serious Golmal, The Perfect Pitch, Dave Cole, Lenin's Tomb, Politics In The Zeros, Nosemonkey, Blood & Treasure, PJC Journal, The Lone Voice, Identity Unknown, Beau Bo D'Or, Sinclair's Musings, The Select Society, Liberal England, Davblog, Peter Gasston, Graeme’s, Sim-O's Random Thoughts, Matt Wardman, Love and Garbage, The Huntsman, Conservative Party Reptile, Ellee Seymour, Sabretache, Not A Sheep, Bartholomew’s Notes on Religion, The People’s Republic Of Newport, Life, the Universe & Everything, Arsenal Transfer Rumour Mill, The Green Ribbon, The Last Ditch, Areopagitica, Football in Finland, Freeborn John, Eursoc, The Back Four, Scots and Independent, The Splund, Bill Cameron, Podnosh, Dodgeblogium, Moving Target, Goonerholic, The Spine, Zero Point Nine, The Durruti Column, The Bristol Blogger, ArseNews, David Lindsay, Quaequam Blog!, On A Quiet Day…, Kathz’s Blog, Theo Spark, Duncan Borrowman, Senn’s Blog, Katykins, Jewcy, Kevin Maguire, Stumbling and Mumbling, Famous for 15 megapixels, AOL Fanhouse, Doctor Vee, The Curmudgeonly, The Poor Mouth, 1820, Hangbitch, Crooked Timber, ArseNole, Liberty Alone, Amused Cynicism, Clairwil, Tampon Teabag, Special/Blown It, The Remittance Man, 18 Doughty Street, D-Notice, Kate's Blog, Tim Worstall (on his shiny new site), more from Ten Percent, more from Ordovicius, The Judge, Indigo Jones Blogs, Disillusioned And Bored, Poldraw, more from Drink-soaked Trots, The Exile, another great post from Obsolete, Spy Blog (recommended), Postman Patel, Political Penguin, Laban Tall, Martin Bright, poons, Jangliss, Who Knows Where Thoughts Come From?, Imagined Community, A Pint of Unionist Lite, Error Gorilla, Swiss Metablog, Kate Garnwen Truemors, Asn14, Miserable Old Fart, Jottings, fridgemagnet, Blah Blah Flowers, J. Arthur MacNumpty, Tony Hatfield, Grendel, Charlie Whitaker, Matt Buck, The Waendel Journal, SoccerLens, Toblog, John Brissenden East Lower, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Peter Black AM, Boing Boing, BLTP, Gunnerblog, LFB UK, Liberal Revolution, Wombles, Focus on Sodbury…, Follow The Money, Freedom and Whisky, Melting Man, PoliticalHackUK, Simon Says…, From The Barrel Of A Gun, Up North John, Nourishing Obscurity, Gizmonaut, more from Chris Paul, Dave Weeden, more from The Cartoonist, Journalist Und Optimist, The Armchair News Blog, The Fourth Place, Daily EM, Francis Sedgemore, Naqniq, Bristol Indymedia, Spin and Spinners, Marginalia, Arnique, Heather Yaxley, The Whiskey Priest, On The Beat, Paul Canning, Martin Stabe, Mat Bowles, Pigdogfucker, Rachel North, El Galés, Liberal Democrat Voice, e-clectig, Vino, more from Podnosh, Moninski, Freunde der offenen Gesellschaft, Samizdata, more from Swiss Metablog, Noodle, Kerching, more from Daily EM, Sicily Scene, I Blog, You Blog, They Blog Weblog, Colcam (also here), more from Random Thoughts, Can't Silence Us All, Alisher Usmanov, Rossinisbird, Bel Is Thinking, Transfattyacid, Atlantic Free Press (also here), Tailrank, UFO Breakfast Recipients, Registan.net, A Very British Dude, Slate, The Home Of Football, Lobster Blogster (also here, here, here and here),Boriswatch, Bloggerheads: The Alisher Usmanov Affair, Dan Hardie, Chris Applegate, Committee To Protect Bloggers, William Bowles, Christopher Glamorgan, Spreeblick, Krusenstern, Skuds' Sister's Brother, Contrast News, Moon of Alabama,... More links as I find them. This is ~~beginning to look like~~ an 'I am Spartacus' moment and the list of Spartaci (is that the right plural?) is still growing- and rightly so because this affects us all.

*UPDATE*

Unity at Ministry of Truth has some interesting thoughts on how to deal with Britain's pernicious libel laws.

*UPDATE 2*

It seems that the mighty Schillings aren't mighty enough to deal with Google Cache. Here is Tim's post on the firm. Oh, and Craig Murray's post on Alisher Usmanov is all over the internet. It will be interesting to read what Boris Johnson, a member of Parliament and London Mayoral candidate, has to say when his blog comes back on-line.

*UPDATE 3*

The Mainstream media have not yet covered this story but there is some recent background coverage which suggests that they may well pick up on this. The Independent, The Times and The Guardian have articles.

*UPDATE 4*

The Mainstream media is starting to take an interest. The Guardian has mentioned it and Sunny from Pickled Politics will be on More 4 News tonight (21 September) at 8pm speaking about this and freedom of speech on the web. Boris Johnson MP is not amused:

Mr Johnson hit out at the closure of his website, calling it "a serious erosion of free speech".

"This is London, not Uzbekistan," the former Spectator editor and MP for Henley-on-Thames said.

"It is unbelievable that a website can be wiped out on the say-so of some tycoon.

"We live in a world where internet communication is increasingly vital, and this is a serious erosion of free speech."

*UPDATE 5*

More thoughts from Unity, this time on the methods used by Schillings.

*UPDATE 6*

The list of bloggers expressing their disgust at the antics of Alisher Usmanov and his pack of Rotweillers is growing at a fantastic rate with many of the posts including Craig Murray's original comments about this (alleged) Uzbek gangster. Now, bearing this in mind, how successful does this intimidation campaign against bloggers look? Has it protected the reputation of Alisher Usmanov or confirmed it? Here's another question: Do Schillings look like the "Leading Law Firm" they say they are, or do they more closely resemble a bunch of second rate ambulance chasers? If I was Alisher Usmanov I'd sack them.

*UPDATE 7*

There is now a Facebook group which you can join called 'Craig Murray's blog should return' Do feel free to join it. Let's see if Alisher Usmanov and his legal bullies manage to silence that.

*UPDATE 8*

I think now is a good time to reproduce the original post by Craig Murray which started this storm:

Alisher Usmanov, potential Arsenal chairman, is a Vicious Thug, Criminal, Racketeer, Heroin Trafficker and Accused Rapist
I thought I should make my views on Alisher Usmanov quite plain to you. You are unlikely to see much plain talking on Usmanov elsewhere in the media becuase he has already used his billions and his lawyers in a pre-emptive strike. They have written to all major UK newspapers, including the latter:
“Mr Usmanov was imprisoned for various offences under the old Soviet regime. We wish to make it clear our client did not commit any of the offences with which he was charged. He was fully pardoned after President Mikhail Gorbachev took office. All references to these matters have now been expunged from police records . . . Mr Usmanov does not have any criminal record.”
Let me make it quite clear that Alisher Usmanov is a criminal. He was in no sense a political prisoner, but a gangster and racketeer who rightly did six years in jail. The lawyers cunningly evoke “Gorbachev”, a name respected in the West, to make us think that justice prevailed. That is completely untrue.
Usmanov’s pardon was nothing to do with Gorbachev. It was achieved through the growing autonomy of another thug, President Karimov, at first President of the Uzbek Soviet Socilist Republic and from 1991 President of Uzbekistan. Karimov ordered the “Pardon” because of his alliance with Usmanov’s mentor, Uzbek mafia boss and major international heroin overlord Gafur Rakimov. Far from being on Gorbachev’s side, Karimov was one of the Politburo hardliners who had Gorbachev arrested in the attempted coup that was thwarted by Yeltsin standing on the tanks outside the White House.
Usmanov is just a criminal whose gangster connections with one of the World’s most corrupt regimes got him out of jail. He then plunged into the “privatisation” process at a time when gangster muscle was used to secure physical control of assets, and the alliance between the Russian Mafia and Russian security services was being formed.
Usmanov has two key alliances. he is very close indeed to President Karimov, and especially to his daughter Gulnara. It was Usmanov who engineered the 2005 diplomatic reversal in which the United States was kicked out of its airbase in Uzbekistan and Gazprom took over the country’s natural gas assets. Usmanov, as chairman of Gazprom Investholdings paid a bribe of $88 million to Gulnara Karimova to secure this. This is set out on page 366 of Murder in Samarkand [hyperlink added].
Alisher Usmanov had risen to chair of Gazprom Investholdings because of his close personal friendship with Putin, He had accessed Putin through Putin’s long time secretary and now chef de cabinet, Piotr Jastrzebski. Usmanov and Jastrzebski were roommates at college. Gazprominvestholdings is the group that handles Gazproms interests outside Russia, Usmanov’s role is, in effect, to handle Gazprom’s bribery and sleaze on the international arena, and the use of gas supply cuts as a threat to uncooperative satellite states.
Gazprom has also been the tool which Putin has used to attack internal democracy and close down the independent media in Russia. Gazprom has bought out - with the owners having no choice - the only independent national TV station and numerous rgional TV stations, several radio stations and two formerly independent national newspapers. These have been changed into slavish adulation of Putin. Usmanov helped accomplish this through Gazprom. The major financial newspaper, Kommersant, he bought personally. He immediately replaced the editor-in-chief with a pro-Putin hack, and three months later the long-serving campaigning defence correspondent, Ivan Safronov, mysteriously fell to his death from a window.
All this, both on Gazprom and the journalist’s death, is set out in great detail here [hyperlink added]
Usmanov is also dogged by the widespread belief in Uzbekistan that he was guilty of a particularly atrocious rape, which was covered up and the victim and others in the know disappeared. The sad thing is that this is not particularly remarkable. Rape by the powerful is an everyday hazard in Uzbekistan, again as outlined in Murder in Samarkand page 120. If anyone has more detail on the specific case involving Usmanov please add a comment.
I reported back in 2002 or 2003 in an Ambassadorial top secret telegram to the Foreign Office that Usmanov was the most likely favoured successor of President Karimov as totalitarian leader of Uzbekistan. I also outlined the Gazprom deal (before it happened) and the present by Usmanov to Putin (though in Jastrzebski’s name) of half of Mapobank, a Russian commercial bank owned by Usmanov. I will never forget the priceless reply from our Embassy in Moscow. They said that they had never even heard of Alisher Usmanov, and that Jastrzebski was a jolly nice friend of the Ambassador who would never do anything crooked.
Sadly, I expect the football authorities will be as purblind. Football now is about nothing but money, and even Arsenal supporters - as tight-knit and homespun a football community as any - can be heard saying they don’t care where the money comes from as long as they can compete with Chelsea.
I fear that is very wrong. Letting as diseased a figure as Alisher Usmanov into your club can only do harm in the long term.

*UPDATE 9*

Did I mention that you can buy 'Murder In Samarkand' here or by clicking the button in the left sidebar?

*UPDATE 10*

From a comment by arsenews.com over at Chicken Yogurt:

If you find any IP addresses from the range
217.33.207.160 - 217.33.207.191
in your logs, they’re Schillings. Just thought you’d like to know that.
http://www.zoneedit.com/whois.html?zone=217.33.207.164

*UPDATE 11*

This story is no longer confined to the UK, it has now gone international. Here is a post from Switzerland and here is one from China, a country well acquainted with internet censorship. Way to go Schillings!

*UPDATE 12*

The Channel 4 News report (with video):

If Usmanov thought that was the end of it, it wasn't.

Over the last 24 hours it's become an internet cause celebre. Craig Murray has found some highly unlikely allies from across the political spectrum.

Over 100 high-profile bloggers have now posted on it and, as we found, some are brazenly posting the original Craig Murray article that started this all off.

Ahahahahahahahaha!!!!

More coverage from the Times.

*UPDATE 13*

Here are some of Craig Murray's last posts before his site vanished (via Google Cache). Scroll down a bit to find this...

Yet More Schillings Bollocks
On my article about Alisher Usmanov which so incensed his lawyers Schillings, let me ask this question. Has anybody seen an argument posted or published from any credible source to argue that what I say about Usmanov is untrue?

I ask the question because one of the edits to this log my webhost made at Schillings' behest was to say that my claim was "regarded as false by many people". I have altered that edit, because there is no justification for such a claim. I have yet to see evidence of anybody, not one solitary person, arguing that I am wrong about Usmanov, other than his lawyers. Who are these "Many people", and why are they peculiarly silent?

I am very sympathetic to my webhost having to change things for Schillings, but not to the extent of altering things to become defamatory of me!!!

...and a bit further down for this (unfortunately out of date and proved wrong - I'm referring to Fasthosts obviously)

September 13, 2007

Censorship
Just to make plain that I have great webhosts who have been extremely supportive in all kinds of circumstances, 24 hours a day. They have wider responsibilities and I have no problem with their taking down or amending my stuff when they get their umpteenth bullying letter from ultra well paid bluffers and extortionists Schillings.

In case it too vanishes, it's saved as a pdf file you can get from here.

*UPDATE 14*

You can now get some lovely blog buttons to decorate your sidebars. From Matt Wardman we have these (please go over there to get the code):

Mike Power has created these buttons (see the left sidebar under "Action Stations"):

Unity at Ministry Of Truth has created these:

Hmmm, decisions decisions. I'm spoiled for choice.

*UPDATE 15*

Unsurprisingly, it seems that Schillings are snooping around the blogs. I found this update on Francis Sedgemore's blog:

Update

Schillings is trawling the blogs via IP 217.33.207.164. Learned friends looking for more bloggers to bully?

That was pretty predictable, but more disturbing was this comment from Septicisle:

Thanks for the IP, added it to my stats labelling. They came to me via the Nether-World.

So the shysters have been snooping around this blog. Again, hardly surprising but sobering nonetheless. After checking my stats I found out that Schillings came to this blog via Cynical Chatter From The Underworld and hung around for a whopping 5 hours 41 mins 14 secs before pissing off to snoop on others. They did this at 9:56am on September 21st and they also checked out Politics In The Zeros (who blogs from the USA and is presumably safe from their bullying).

Well I'm still on-line so far. It certainly isn't inconceivable that this blog could get shut down but Google are big and Schillings will have a job doing it, not least because I haven't violated their Terms of Service. Of course if a large number of blogs get pulled then this story will become big news very quickly indeed, something even an incompetent law firm like ~~Flywheel, Shyster and Flywheel~~ Schillings ought to realise. I'll make a back up of this post and put it on the mirror site I have reserved for such emergencies if it does mysteriously vanish. As we know, the last thing Usmanov wants is a court case where Craig Murray could get called as a witness.

For people worried about unwanted attention, it is possible to block a number of IP addresses so that the unwelcome visitor is redirected to a webpage of your choice when a blocked IP address is used (I'm thinking of using this one). Schillings IP addresses range from 217.33.207.160 - 217.33.207.191. Blocking them won't stop determined Rotweillers but it will cause inconvenience (time is money after all) and it's worth it just for that.

*UPDATE 16*

Bob Piper is back! Well sort of anyway. I read his post on Google Reader but when I tried to get to his page from there, I got a screen saying "Internal Server Error". I did manage to get to his site from my blogroll but I got the same error message when I tried to leave a comment welcoming him back. So if you're reading this Bob, welcome back to blogland. I'm sure these errors are just glitches that will disappear soon. Anyway, this is of what he has to say:

Well, I'm back! At the moment it would appear Boris, Tim, Craig and Clive are still down, but I know Clive has been working like a trooper since Thursday to back up all the blog files and move them to another server. If anyone is looking for a webhost then I would heartily recommend Clive at UK Today (Although you cannot get there at the minute). Anyway, it makes a change to be attracting attention for something I hadn't said.... although the Leader of Sandwell Council will probably have blown a gasket when he saw my name caught up in all of this.

Thanks to everyone who has supported the campaign for Tim and Craig, particularly Justin who kicked it all off. The list below is from Justin's site. Also many thanks to those who offered me webspace or to be a guest poster, the good folks at Blairwatch, Cassilis and John Hirst were particularly encouraging. As Tom Watson said, this Usamov creature must be one hell of a unifier if he can get Iain Dale writing in support of Tim Ireland's free speech.... perhaps now Iain will allow Tim back on his own comments in the new spirit of glastnost.

Let's hope Tim, Clive, Craig and Boris return soon.

*UPDATE 17*

No prizes for guessing what's the "Story of the Week" on the latest BritBlog Roundup (hosted by Liberal England).

*UPDATE 18*

Isn't it interesting how little coverage there has been in the mainstream media of this issue? Apart from More 4 News, The Times and The Guardian there has been silence while this controversy has raged across the internet. I hope this changes soon. By increasing the coverage in the blogosphere we can hopefully force the MSM to do its job despite the bluffing by Schillings. The BBC have been useless on this. It can produce a lengthly piece about Usmanov increasing his stake in Arsenal without even obliquely referring to the controversy surrounding him.

*UPDATE 19*

Boris Johnson is now back on-line. Welcome back Boris! I hope the prominent MP and London Mayoral candidate will have something to say soon about Mr Creosote, his pack of shysters and the cowardly Fasthosts. Until he does decide to comment, we have the statement he made at the start of this saga:

"This is London, not Uzbekistan. It is unbelievable that a website can be wiped out on the say-so of some tycoon. We live in a world where internet communication is increasingly vital, and this is a serious erosion of free speech."

Tim Ireland still isn't on-line just yet but his Bloggerheads site is displaying a test message which is encouraging. No sign of Craig Murray and Clive Summerfield yet.

*UPDATE 20*

I meant to blog this earlier today but didn't.

Interim Statement from Clive Summerfield and Tim Ireland:
We’d like to thank you all for your support and let you all know just what the hell has been going on, but we beg your patience as we continue with the practical measures required before we can fully and confidently speak our minds about this matter.

Our immediate priority is the restoration of the websites involved; this has been greatly complicated by the sudden closure of the entire account (as opposed to, say, the suspension or closure of the two websites directly involved in the Usmanov dispute). This total - and totally unexpected - withdrawal of service requires us to restore many websites with differing individual circumstances and formats. The removal of email used for the majority of these accounts has also further complicated matters, as the most immediate form of communication between many of the parties involved is no longer available.

Bob Piper is already back on deck, and we expect Boris Johnson’s weblog to be up and running shortly. Special arrangements are being made for Craig Murray as we speak.

A full statement is likely to follow the restoration of Bloggerheads and/or The UK Today, as it is at one of these websites that we would wish to host a full statement and manage the expected response.

*UPDATE 21*

Some more media coverage to add to these: More 4 News, The Times and The Guardian. The Register has produced a couple of articles, this one and a much more in-depth one here with some glorious fighting talk from Craig Murray (via):

Former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray has vowed to carry on making allegations against billionaire Arsenal shareholder Alisher Usmanov, despite attempts to silence him and his supporters.

Murray told The Reg: "If the man believes he was libelled then he should take me to court."

Well, quite! The article ends with:

The new hosting has been arranged separately from the rest of Summerfield's sites - Murray believes that Usmanov's lawyers are trying to make him back down by attacking others.

We asked Murray if he intends to stay on Usmanov's back. He replied: "There is room on Usmanov's back for an awful lot of people. You could get even more on his stomach, and possibly lose some under the overlap of his chins."

We think that's a "yes".

Fantastic! Associated Press has also covered the story which means it's now found its way into the Moscow Times. I wonder if that publication has received threatening letters from the shysters. Now it looks like Mr Creosote and his clumsy law firm have another problem. From PJC Journal and England Expects, I'm hearing that the allegations against this (alleged) gangster will be heard in the European Parliament.

Tonight, during the Saryusz-Wolski report "Towards a common European foreign policy on energy" the Euro realist MEP Tom Wise will use parliamentary privilege to spell out the allegations against Alisher Usmanov. He has been talking to Craig Murray to ensure that the allegations are accurate and to the point.

The purpose of the debate is to discuss the creation of a single energy policy for Europe controlled by an European Energy Minister (or in Eurocratese a "High Official").

As Mr Usmanov is in the words of Murray who "who ordered the cutting off of supplies to Georgia earlier this year" this is extremely relevant to the debate.

Under the rules governing parliamentary privilege, any news organisation can repeat what has been said in the Parliament chamber, allowing the MSM to circumvent the legal threats being thrown about by Usmanov's lawyers Schillings.

Is that the sound of toys being thrown out of prams that I'm hearing?

Tags: Freedom of Speech, Islom Karimov, Alisher Usmanov, Blogging, Arsenal

Taking Liberties

2007-05-15T17:24:00.000+01:00

This film is at the top of my 'must see' list. As the title suggests, Taking Liberties is about the attack on civil liberties that Britain has experienced since 1997 when Tony Blair came to power. Other than the various plugs for it I've seen on numerous blogs of all political persuasions and, of course, the information on the film's website along with the trailer, I don't know that much about it but it certainly seems to be a very interesting documentary and a fitting tribute to the Blair years. The film covers the following topics:

Tim Ireland over at Bloggerheads has seen the press screening and has written a positive review. Here's the trailer on YouTube:

Taking Liberties will be in cinemas from June 8. It is very unlikely to get anything like the same publicity that Hollywood bockbusters get and it will only be shown in a few selected cinemas so check the website's cinema listings to find out where it's showing.

Tags: Taking Liberties, Films, Civil Liberties, Entertainment, Blair

Craig Murray forced to remove documents from his website

2006-07-12T20:06:00.000+01:00

Craig Murray has head to remove the some of the documents he put on his website to support the claims he made in his book ‘Murder in Samarkand’. From Craig’s Website:

"We need another Dickens"
New Labour are not as stupid as they seem. I have now had a chance to take legal advice, and that advice is as follows. To defend this case would cost the price of a London house. I don't have a house, in London or anywhere else. I am therefore obliged to give in to force majeure and remove some of the documents from my own site. This reeking government is therefore able to mask its stink on this particular miniscule corner of the internet.

Here is another piece of legal advice I received. Copyright cases cover one instance of publication in one place. Anyone else who has published any government documents that might be Crown Copyright, or not, (and I believe there are hundreds of thousands of documents on the web on which the government could, by the argument in Mr Buttrill's letter, claim copyright), is an individual case and can wait to hear from Mr Buttrill.Force Majeure wields a two-edged sword.

Craig

But never mind, these documents are spread so far and wide over the internet now that Mr Buttrill will never be able to stop people seeing them. If you haven’t seen the documents yet, they’re available from here here, here, here, here, here, here, and as a bittorrent here. Also as an Edonkey File and here is a Magnet link for the Bittorent share. There is also a .torrent of the documents on mininova.

Hat-Tip to Chicken Yoghurt

Tags: Craig Murray, Murder in Samarkand, Torture, Rendition, Freedom of Information

Murder in Samarkand - Documents:

2006-07-08T07:25:00.000+01:00

The former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, has finally managed to publish his book Murder in Samarkand in which he describes the appalling human rights abuses by the US-funded regime of President Islam Karimov, and what happened when Craig tried to expose those abuses and the British and US complicity with the Karimov regime over torture.

The UK Government has tried to prevent the book being published and in order to get around the censorship Craig has put the supporting documents on his website.

In publishing "Murder in Samarkand" I had wanted to publish the supporting documentation in the book to cooroborate my story, especially as the FCO is claiming that the story is essentially untrue. In that sense, perhaps the most interesting link in the documents below is the very first document, which is a table of detailed amendments the FCO insisted be made to the text. This is fascinating if you consider just how much it confirms was true, particularly in the conversations it refers to between officials. - More and suppporting documents

The Government is now trying to silence Craig using the Crown Copyright Laws because he is not contravening the Official Secret's Act by publishing the documents on-line. They are threatening legal action and it is uncertain how much longer the documents will be available on his site.

Click on image for larger version or download pdf here

Blairwatch is mirroring the site here in the UK and several sites in the USA are also mirroring the documents and they should be unreachable by the UK Government. However the more bloggers who publish these documents, the less likely it is that the Government can succeed in stopping them spreading, so I am publishing them here. If this site does get shut down, then Dahr Jamail in the USA has a torrent file to share, and a zip to download of all the documents directly. You can also download a zip file from Polizeros.

An introduction to the documents, by Craig Murray:
In publishing "Murder in Samarkand" I had wanted to publish the supporting Documentation in the book to cooroborate my story, especially as the FCO is claiming that the story is essentially untrue. In that sense, perhaps the most interesting link in the Documents below is the very first Document, which is a table of detailed amendments the FCO insisted be made to the text. This is fascinating if you consider just how much it confirms was true, particularly in the conversations it refers to between officials.

Many of the other Documents I managed to have released under the Freedom of Information Act or Data Protection Act. I was astonished when the FCO announced that they would still take legal action against me if I published them. They argue that, and this astonished me, even if a Document is released under the DPA or FoIA, it is still copyright of the Crown and so cannot be published. I was even more amazed when the lawyers of the publisher said that this was probably true, and certainly could not be fought without potentially a million pound legal case.

It appears that, among so many attacks on civil liberties in recent years, the Blair government has managed to administratively negate its own Freedom of Information Act. Robin Cook must be spinning in his grave.

So we have made Murder in Samarkand an interactive bookthe Documents are published here, and referenced by URL in the text. Net posting is not breaching copyright because there is no charge to access the Documents. This site may, of course, be subject to technical attack, so I would be grateful if those who can mirror these documents on their own sites, do so.

These are contemporary Documents from my time as Ambassador in Uzbekistan. They do I believe include the real smoking gun on Britain's, and the CIA's, use of intelligence obtained by torture abroad. They also show the FCO getting increasingly angry with me over my being "over-focussed on human rights", rahter than building good relationships with Karimov, our ally in the War on Terror.

They do not give a smoking gun that proves that the allegations brought against me, of which I was eventually cleared, were trumped-up and motivated by a desire to get rid of me for policy reasons. Being internal FCO Documents, they are written to maintain the facade of a proper disciplinary investigation. You need to be prepared to read between the lines - and read the book!

Craig

Here are the Documents:

FCO Comment

IMF Telegram

Declaration

Speech

Hill Negotiation

Michael Wood memo of 13 March

Telegram of 18 March ‘2003 US Foreign Policy’

Letter from Simon Butt dated 16 April 2003

Exchange of emails with Linda Duffield

Colin Reynolds Report of 26 June 2003

Minute of my meeting with Howard Drake

Letter from British Businessmen in Tashkent

Email to Kate Smith

Minute of 26 September 2003

Tags: Torture, Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, Nu Labour

Internet in danger part 2

2006-07-02T05:54:00.000+01:00

Just over a couple of months ago I posted a report about the threat to the internet posed by telecommunications giants in America wanting to put “toll booths” on the information superhighway, creating a two-tiered system in which those who pay more get faster access. The issue of Net Neutrality, at the time of that post, was limited to the United States and to a certain extent it still is. However, I warned in April that if the telecommunication companies in America get their way, it won’t be long before Britain follows suit.

Well, it is starting to look like the threat is coming closer to Britain now, with the UK media finally picking up the story.

Millions of people will be forced to pay a 'congestion charge' for sending email under plans being developed by American telephone companies to create a 'two-tier' internet.

In a move which campaigners warn will destroy the openness and equality of the worldwide web, the US telecommunications group AT&T is lobbying politicians to allow the development of 'fast' and 'slow' internet services.

All data moving around the net is now treated equally and moves at the same speed, whether it is a personal blog or the website of a multinational corporation. But with the quantity of traffic soaring by the day, there are fears that the network could become clogged and slow down. American internet service providers argue that they should be allowed to charge customers to use a 'fast lane' giving their data priority.

Industry experts say a 'two-tier internet' could see individuals and businesses charged a penny for each email they send, or asked to pay a premium for services such as online TV or an annual subscription for constant preferential treatment. This could leave less well-off users in the 'slow lane' of the information superhighway with an inferior service, as emails take longer to arrive and websites work more slowly.

[...]

Analysts say it is too early to know how such a change in the US would affect Britain, although anyone who does business there or visits an American website might be affected. In the longer term they predict that BT and other service providers could follow the example of their US counterparts by seeking to create a two-tier network for the UK.

David Tansley, a technology specialist at the UK consulting firm Deloitte, said: 'The question is, how do you marshall a finite resource where demand exceeds supply? Do you just keep adding lanes to the motorway or do you look for a way of disincentivising some of the motorists? Unless you can defy the laws of physics, you have to consider a congestion charge. I think BT will do the same as the American telecoms companies.'
Source

I think it’s worth drawing more attention to this problem before it becomes impossible to defeat. It will affect what we can and can’t say on the internet as well as how much it will cost us to say what we are allowed to. The way things tend to work in Britain these days is first we get an assurance that some awful initiative won’t happen, followed by the promise of a debate which never materialises or turns out to be just an insistence that there is no alternative, to the thing just happening without much (or enough) opposition. This is what has happened with wars, ID card legislation, the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill, the nuclear issue… you name it. Nearly everybody uses the internet these days for all sorts of reasons and we are already paying for it. This is just pure corporate greed and control freakery… again.

Tags: Internet, Blogging, Net Freedom

The Pernicious Poison in the Government

2006-04-25T03:25:00.000+01:00

Following the media debate on the erosion of civil liberties started by The Observer’s Henry Porter, the government is striking back, apparently stung and offended by the temerity of a small hand full of journalists who dared to suggest that their policies are overly authoritarian and bringing Britain closer to becoming a police state. New Labour has come out on the offensive in an attempt to convince us either that they are not removing our civil liberties or that removing our civil liberties is the only way to preserve them.

First up was Tony Blair on Sunday telling us that he

“would widen the police powers to seize the cash of suspected drug dealers, the cars they drive round in, and require them to prove they came by them, lawfully. I would impose restrictions on those suspected of being involved in organised crime. In fact, I would generally harry, hassle and hound them until they give up or leave the country.” (my emphasis)

No amount of spin can alter the fact that this is completely contrary to the long-established principle of being innocent until proven guilty. It gets worse; The Observer also reported that:

Even if they are not convicted of a crime and there is insufficient evidence to try them, suspects could be banned from associating with certain individuals or travelling to certain places, in order to disrupt trades such as human trafficking.

So that is the end of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ is it? Not according to the Safety Elephant who at the end of a speech yesterday said:

“And let me conclude with one of the more ridiculous statements: "The presumption of innocence is no longer a fixed legal principal". This is complete nonsense. In this country that you are innocent of an offence until proven guilty.”

Sorry Mr Clarke, the only response to that is “Bullshit!” Not only does that statement contradict what the Prime Minister said, it contradicts the facts on the ground. Control orders, for example, where people have been put under house arrest without having been charged with a crime let alone been found guilty of one. And that was only because the Home Secretary was forced to have them released from Belmarsh where they had been illegally incarcerated.

Mr Clarke’s speech was a response to articles in The Observer and The Independent which reasonably pointed out that New Labour’s policies are increasingly authoritarian and are attacking civil liberties. ID cards, the ‘anti-terror’ legislation, the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill, DNA database, ASBOs, severe limits on ‘unauthorised’ demonstrations, tapping the phones of MPs, the depressing list goes on.

“But I believe that a pernicious and even dangerous poison is now slipping into at least some parts of this media view of the world. In the absence of many of the genuinely dangerous and evil totalitarian dictatorships to fight - since they've gone - the media has steadily rhetorically transferred to some of the existing democracies, particularly the United States and the United Kingdom, some of the characteristics of those dictatorships.”

That’s because The United States and the United Kingdom now share some of the characteristics of the old dictatorships. I never dreamed that America and Britain would support torture, ‘extraordinary rendition’, illegal wars, anti-democratic legislation and even changing the Geneva Convention. Don’t shoot the messenger Mr Clarke; look at what you are doing!

“So some commentators routinely use language like 'police state', 'fascist', 'hijacking our democracy', 'creeping authoritarianism', 'destruction of the rule of law', whilst words like 'holocaust', 'gulag' and 'apartheid' are regularly used descriptively of our society in ways which must be truly offensive to those who experienced those realities.”
Full Speech

Yes, that’s right; it’s calling a spade a spade. And yes it is offensive; it is as offensive now as it was then. What else is this if not ‘destruction of the rule of law’?

In this case, the judge said, Charles Clarke had made his decision to issue the order based on "one-sided information", but he was "unable to envisage the circumstances" allowing the court to quash the home secretary's decision. As a result, the judge said, he would have to leave the order in place, even though he ruled that it contravened human rights law ... "Controlees' rights ... are being determined not by an independent court ... but by executive decision making untrammelled by any prospect of effective judicial supervision ... If you erect a structure where people in the position of your client, to be frank, don't have a chance, the secretary of state is always going to win."
Source

And the pictures of Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib make the term ‘gulag’ seem mild to me. Bringing in legislation that allows laws can to made, altered and changed by a Minister WITHOUT having to go through parliament for a vote or even a debate, cannot be anything else but ‘hijacking our democracy'.

Attacking the media for belatedly expressing concern for what is happening is further proof of the fascist direction this government is taking us in. Thankfully, at the moment at least, we still do have a robust relatively free media, but from the tone of Charles Clarke’s speech I doubt it will stay that way for long. I say ‘relatively’ because the mainstream media too has been guilty of gross media distortions which do not seem to attract the ire of the Government when they support their position.

Unsurprisingly, many blogs have commented on this important issue and will continue to do so, unless they too are somehow silenced. There is more excellent coverage from (amongst many):

Blairwatch, Bloggerheads, Chicken Yoghurt, Curious Hamster and Devil's Kitchen

Tags: Blair, New Labour, Civil Liberties, Democracy

Internet in Danger

2006-04-22T01:52:00.000+01:00

Special thanks to Dahr Jamail for informing me of this via email alert.

The internet is one of the last bastions of free speech (at least in most of the world). The ease with which people can exchange ideas and spread information over large distances rapidly and for very little cost has caused an information revolution. Even with the corporate media making its presence felt on the world wide web, there has always been plenty of room for other people to write about anything they wanted to. Blogging, of course, has accelerated this phenomenon even further, transforming the mainstream media as well as the internet.

All this is now under threat. The issue is Network Neutrality, an obscure term not mentioned much here in the UK but attracting a lot of attention in the USA. Congress is trying to push through a bill that will effectively put toll booths on the information superhighway. As the demand for broadband increases in the USA, large corporations like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast are looking for ways to gain maximum profit from the demand. The way for them to do this is to force the government to abandon network neutrality which Save the Internet.com describes as the Internet's first amendment.

“Network neutrality” is a voluntary but guiding principle of the Internet which ensures that all users are entitled to access content and services or run applications and devices of their choice.
Net neutrality fosters open competition and innovation among service providers, while preserving the independence and accessibility of the World Wide Web. The current abundance of online content is the offspring of net neutrality. Under network neutrality, consumers enjoy limitless choices.
Full article

This means that there is a level playing field for everyone on the internet, from the smallest blog to the largest corporate website. Abandoning this principle would allow large companies like AT&T to rig the playing field for only the highest-paying Web sites. Those companies would then act as Internet gatekeepers with the power to decide the speed with which certain websites load (or don't load at all) depending on who pays them the most. Those that don't pay enough will be relegated to a 'slow lane' where they would have to wait for ages for a site to load like in the days of slow dial-up modems.

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) has accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions from the big telecommunication companies to sponsor a bill that will basically hand over the internet to those companies. At the moment this is primarily an American issue, but if the bill passes it is bound to effect everybody eventually. How will it affect us? Well:

Google users—Another search engine could pay dominant Internet providers like AT&T to guarantee the competing search engine opens faster than Google on your computer.

Innovators with the “next big idea”—Startups and entrepreneurs will be muscled out of the marketplace by big corporations that pay Internet providers for dominant placing on the Web. The little guy will be left in the “slow lane” with inferior Internet service, unable to compete.

Ipod listeners—A company like Comcast could slow access to iTunes, steering you to a higher-priced music service that it owned.

Political groups—Political organizing could be slowed by a handful of dominant Internet providers who ask advocacy groups to pay “protection money” for their websites and online features to work correctly.

Nonprofits—A charity’s website could open at snail-speed, and online contributions could grind to a halt, if nonprofits can’t pay dominant Internet providers for access to “the fast lane” of Internet service.

Online purchasers—Companies could pay Internet providers to guarantee their online sales process faster than competitors with lower prices—distorting your choice as a consumer.

Small businesses and tele-commuters—When Internet companies like AT&T favor their own services, you won’t be able to choose more affordable providers for online video, teleconferencing, Internet phone calls, and software that connects your home computer to your office.

Parents and retirees—Your choices as a consumer could be controlled by your Internet provider, steering you to their preferred services for online banking, health care information, sending photos, planning vacations, etc.

Bloggers—Costs will skyrocket to post and share video and audio clips—silencing citizen journalists and putting more power in the hands of a few corporate-owned media outlets.
Source

Obviously this awful example of corporate greed is bad news for anybody who uses the internet and needs to be stopped before it goes much further. If you live in America there are things you can do to fight this legislation.

Find out where your representative stands on this issue.
Sign this petition to tell your elected representatives to protect Internet freedom now.
Tell your friends about this campaign.
Learn more about this issue.
Become an eActivist.

Tags: America, Blogging, Net Freedom

The confusion of 'glorification'

2006-04-14T09:44:00.000+01:00

A free people ought not not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government. --George Washington (terrorist?)

With all yesterday's drama of an ex government advisor being arrested in connection with the loans for honours scandal, it was easy to overlook the fact that this was also the day that another part of the Government's new anti-terror legislation came into force. It is now illegal to glorify terrorism. The ever-Curious Hamster wrote an excellent piece on this issue, pointing out that: Sometimes it is necessary to take decisive action against an objectionable government.

History offers us plenty of other examples of people who could be considered as terrorists but who have instead been 'glorified', I'll just mention one to make the point: Oliver Cromwell fought against the legitimate head of the British state and had him decapitated for good measure. Is he vilified like those who seem to be fixated with beheading our current establishment? Er no, his statue stands outside the Houses of Parliament (although after the monarchy was restored in 1660, his body was dug up from Westminster Abbey and hung, drawn and quartered, the standard penalty for treason in those days).

There is another well-publicised issue regarding the 'glorification of terrorism', and that is simply the confusion over what actually constitutes 'glorification'. The new law is so badly drafted that no one really has an answer to this other than vague assurances from the Government that the law won't be abused and won't affect freedom of speech.

Yeah Right!

The main criticism of the law is that it is too broad and that it will affect our rights to demonstrate, to dramatise or to satirise and possibly even to comment on issues regarding terrorism. The recent demonstrations in London over the offensive cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad where the protesters brandished equally offensive placards is a case in point. Tony Blair told us that the new legislation would ensure that those protesters could be prosecuted, despite them already being prosecuted under existing legislation.

So, people demonstrating with placards like the one above are glorifying terrorism. But the message on the placard is now being viewed by even more people all over the world. Does that mean that I am glorifying terrorism? Or is it only glorifying terrorism if I agree with the message? (Just for the record, I don't). This has consequences for news organisations and journalists everywhere, let alone bloggers.

What about drama and satire? It will be very easy for plays, films and comedy routines to fall foul of this law and yet we are assured that it won't affect freedom of speech. Even supporting other causes is now dangerous. How can one express support for Palestinian freedom from Israeli oppression, murder and ethnic cleansing without coming dangerously close to glorifying terrorism. Indeed the Prime Minister's wife nearly did this four years ago. And its not just Palestine:

But critics feared a catch-all offence of "glorification" of terrorism, rather than the "indirect incitement" the Lords suggested, would criminalise people supporting the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa, or even celebrating the Easter Uprising of 1916 in Ireland.

Source

It won't take long before this new law is tested in the courts and it will be very interesting to see how the judges react to it, particularly after last Wednesday's ruling by Mr Justice Sullivan against the Government's system of control orders against terror suspects which he described as "an affront to justice". Along with corruption, bad legislation is one of the hallmarks of this Government.

Tags: Britain, New Labour, Justice, Freedom

Bad News

2006-03-06T06:39:00.000Z

The news that the Pentagon intends to continue its policy of planting pro American stories in the Iraqi press and indeed to expand its operation to include other countries with the Lincoln Group, is worrying to anyone concerned with freedom of the press. Propaganda is, of course, not a new phenomenon, but in this media driven age where most of the news comes from a few huge corporations there is a danger of an unprecedented control of the media.

It is not just in far-away war zones that propaganda is an issue. In the USA last year there were stories of fake journalists asking helpful questions at presidential press conferences. More disturbing, there were stories about the US government planting its own television reports in the mainstream news.

And it is not just in America that this sort of thing happens. The British government too has its own fake news network financed by the Foreign Office. Medialens has just released an article about the infiltration of the intelligence services in the British mainstream media.

"While it might be difficult to identify precisely the impact of the spooks (variously represented in the press as "intelligence", "security", "Whitehall" or "Home Office" sources) on mainstream politics and media, from the limited evidence it looks to be enormous."

This is particularly alarming as the propaganda war with Iran heats up and the distortion of facts can poison the minds of the public leading to support for another war based on falsehoods. There is now a backlash against the mainstream media and more and more people are relying on the internet for their news. However, this also has its problems as the news we get on the internet also originates from mainstream news sources, even in the majority of blogs.

Bloggers, so far, have been largely free to write whatever they like, whether they use the mainstream news as a source or not. But this last bastion of free speech seems also to be under threat. The blog of a policeman, ‘The World Weary Detective’ has been censored.

"On Friday 3rd March 2006, the Management Board of the Metropolitan Police Service issued the following statement to all members of staff:’ Recently the organisation has become aware of a series of web-logs or blogs - where authors - claiming to be police officers - have offered their views on a number of issues in a highly personalised, often controversial manner.’ This statement is followed by 'guidance' on writing blogs. In summary, this states that although 'bogging' cannot be stopped, the 'impact of expressing views and opinions that are damaging to the organisation or bring the organisation into disrepute' must be considered. Disciplinary proceedings may be considered against posters of material that may be (among other things) defamatory, offensive or otherwise inappropriate. I have committed no crime. I have compromised no police operations. I have received no payment for anything published on this blog. All opinions expressed are my own. It is therefore with deep regret and great sadness that I must announce that I will no longer be submitting posts to this blog. I cannot challenge New Scotland Yard. I am weary indeed and cowardice is my bedmate. The protection of my family must take precedence. To each and every one of you - take note of what has happened here and be afraid."

There is more on this story from Rachel from North London. We all need to be on our toes when gathering our news and when writing our blogs. The fight for freedom of speech and freedom of information is turning into one of the biggest issues this early part of the 21st Century.

In Defence of Freedom

2006-02-22T21:09:00.000Z

In an earlier post I talked about freedom of speech (as I often do) in reaction to the draconian laws curbing this fundamental right proposed by the Prime Minister and voted for in Parliament, the place where such rights are supposed to be protected. This was written in the heated political climate caused by the publication of cartoons and their use by religious extremists and anti-Muslim politicians resulting in disturbances over the world.

The issue of freedom-of-speech is occurring again and again these days, and a very thorny issue it is too. It is often the first civil liberty too come under attack because of its power to undermine the authority of the day. This post was originally going to be a reply to a post on Blairwatch which referred to the recent jailing of the discredited ‘historian’ and fascist nut case David Irving for the crime of denying the Holocaust, a crime which in Austria can (and did) lead to imprisonment. On that site I made a very quick reply defending Irving’s right to make an even bigger idiot of himself than he already has and wondered why it was just the Holocaust that it is illegal to deny and not, say, Hiroshima, for example.

Blairwatch did us all a huge favour by opening up a genuine and healthy debate among so many people who usually agree with each other (as Ringverse said, “It keeps us all awake!”). On that posting and the subsequent comments made, many valid points were made on both sides of the argument which cause us all to think hard about our respective positions which can only be a good thing. As I thought more about my position I came to the conclusion that this subject deserves more than a quick comment, hence a fuller posting here as I believe this issue to be of enormous importance in the current hysterical climate.

We have all been very quick to condemn Tony Blair for introducing legislation which will affect our ability to protest and satirise, and rightly so. But we have to be aware that the freedoms we fight to keep also apply to those we disagree with, otherwise such freedom is meaningless. Arguments should be won or lost by their merits or lack of them, not by the full force of the law. If an argument cannot withstand criticism then it simply is not a good argument. As it happens, the argument that a Holocaust did occur is extremely sound which is why David Irving looks so ludicrous. There are still many survivors of the Holocaust and plenty of primary sources to demonstrate the veracity of this shameful episode in European history. I myself have visited the remains of Auschwitz and it was a very sobering experience. But I will still defend the right for people to deny such obvious facts. I would even argue that we need clowns like Irving to strengthen our arguments even further. By rubbing his nose in the overwhelming evidence for the Holocaust, we demonstrate to everybody that it was a genuine event and not an article of faith.

There will always be some limits imposed on freedom-of-speech, but these should be kept to an absolute minimum and only be used when someone’s speech directly interferes with the freedom of others. Ringverse’s example of interrupting a film in a cinema illustrates this well. But when we go to such an event we agree to a certain code of behaviour for the duration of that event in order not to spoil the event for others because that would be infringing on their freedom. Similarly, the libel laws exist because the libelled parties can be ruined by the untrue things said about them, thus affecting their freedom. Is this the case with Irving’s Holocaust denial? I don’t think so because he has zero credibility. If he makes a speech denying the Holocaust, no one is forcing us to attend or listen. Certainly what he says is a pack of lies and deeply offensive to the memories of the dead and their relatives, but if being an offensive liar is illegal then the jails of the world would be overflowing. The comments of this Nazi sympathiser do not infringe on our freedom to refute his lies or to ignore him. Nor was Irving directly inciting violence, he may have given some comfort to Austria’s numerous neo-Nazis, but if the best they can come up with is a totally discredited ‘historian’, then that is far safer than them having a martyr to freedom-of speech. Rabbi Dr Jonathan Romain, director of the Jewish Information and Media Service put it succinctly, when questioned on whether Irving should have been jailed for this crime, he replied: "I welcome yet another public rebuff for David Irving's pseudo-historical views, although personally I prefer to treat him with disdain than with imprisonment”.

Limiting freedom of expression (and that is exactly what this issue is about) shows us in the same light as the people we are supposed to be discrediting. The Nazis, among all their other monstrous crimes, started by removing the freedom of speech in as many ways as they could think of, including the burning of books. Do we really want to emulate that sort of behaviour? Are our convictions and ideals so weak that they can only be reinforced with brute force? David Irving may have publicly recanted his Holocaust denial but does anyone think for one minute that he has now seen the light? Introducing unnecessary limits on freedom of expression is the thin end of a wedge that eventually removes all our freedoms. We are witnessing this now in the UK where our government is looking for more and more ways to control what we do, say or think. And a government can get away with this by starting with an issue that has a general consensus like, say, the Holocaust, or child pornography on the internet and before long legislation comes in against “glorifying terrorism”. It doesn’t take a great leap of imagination to see where governments can go from there once they have their foot in the door and have established that “there must be some limits on freedom”. So far in the UK we don’t have anti Holocaust-denying legislation (unlike: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Switzerland), but I can imagine Tony Blair watching with great interest the removal of an irritation and wondering how he can introduce and adapt similar legislation to suit his agenda. Imagine the crime of “denying the liberation of Iraq”, sounds a bit like the law Nazi Germany had of “denying the final victory” doesn’t it? We already have John Reid telling us not to criticise the brutality of our troops, and many of us are aware of our government’s fight to prevent the publication of anything that might embarrass it.

Maybe part of the argument is that six million Jews is such a huge number that there must be an exception to normal freedom-of speech issues. However, Stalin murdered between 10 and 50 million people in his purges, including Jews and Gypsies and I am not aware of any legislation against denying that particular horror although there is plenty of debate about the exact numbers (and no one faces jail for debating). Do we have to have a list of events which spells out what we can and cannot deny? What if some idiot denies September 11th? Do we have to rush to persecute under the auspices of libelling the victims? Until recently I did not know there was such a thing as an illegal opinion. We must have the freedom to be wrong!

Fascist Britain

2006-02-16T05:38:00.000Z

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

Britain has just lost another important freedom. This time it is the right to speak and express oneself freely that has gone. And in yet another Orwellian twist the reason given for this loss of freedom is the preservation of freedom. Using the excuse of “glorifying terrorism” the right to protest, satirise, dramatise or to express an opinion contrary to that of the government has been severely curtailed.

By removing this freedom Tony Blair, with the support of his party, has caused incalculable damage to the country, making it much more like the regimes he is so quick to criticise and bomb. The concept of freedom of speech is really very simple and has been part of Western political thought for years… you can say whatever you like, draw any picture you like, write anything you like and protest against anything you don’t like. This important mainstay of democracy is why so many people from oppressed regimes came to Britain. There was a clear and recognised difference between saying something and doing something. But that was before New Labour. Now supporting the Palestinians is “glorifying terrorism”, as is opposing British and American torture and genocide in Iraq and expressing the desire to see it defeated. And all this without even bothering to clearly define the terms “glorifying” or “terrorism”, meaning that a prosecutor can make anything “glorifying terrorism”.

Freedom of speech has been under attack in Britain from both religious extremists and the British government. On one side we have militant Sikhs trying (and succeeding) to prevent a play being shown, Muslims furious at some rather tasteless cartoons and Christians trying to ban a musical. On the other side we have the draconian laws of New Labour who want to prevent any dissent whilst pretending that they are preserving our freedom. Both sides are destroying the foundation of democracy, the right to express oneself. With real freedom of speech enshrined in a constitution, all these things are permissible. If you don’t like a book don’t buy it. If you hate a film change the channel, and if you’re still upset you can demonstrate with any offensive rubbish you like written on a placard. Only actual violence is forbidden. That’s the beauty of a free society. Even moronic racists like the BNP's Nick Griffin have a right to express their narrow-minded views. Voltaire was absolutely right when he allegedly said: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” It really is as simple as that.

As we sleepwalk into Tony Blair’s fascist utopia its worth reflecting on the milestones we passed leading up to this latest assault on our civil liberties. The surveillance society is a fact of life. Britain has more cameras than any other country watching our every move. Even the speed cameras are now being upgraded to watch us when we are not speeding, so that our journeys are known to the police. Tony Blair’s “respect agenda” is designed to turf people out of their homes if their children dare to play on the streets because his government has sold off the playing fields for yet another Tesco superstore. Identity Cards will soon be compulsory and will store all kinds of information about us accessible to just about anyone except us. Records of our telephone conversations are to be kept for two years. Peacefully protesting outside parliament is now illegal. Even reading out the names of British war casualties will get you arrested, and shouting “nonsense” at a Labour Party conference will result in you getting roughed up by thugs and then arrested under the “prevention of terrorism act” even if you are in your eighties. Our DNA is recorded and kept in a vast data bank whether we have committed crimes or not, it’s just taken at birth or extracted by the police for even the most minor of reasons. Going into a pub or club will mean having our fingerprints scanned and the results shared with other establishments and the police. Even MPs are now liable to be bugged by the security services. And the full weight of the law is brought down on anyone who publishes anything that might be embarrassing to the government or its master across the Atlantic. The only refuge now for dissenters is cyberspace and the internet too is under attack. Its only a matter of time before posts like these become illegal and bloggers are also accused of “glorifying terrorism”. The mainstream media has already seen the danger and decided that discretion is the better side of valour and avoids reporting anything controversial. And the list goes on: detention without trial, limitation of trial by jury, complicity in America's extraordinary rendition policy and other illegal international acts...

And as this goes on the vast majority of the population submissively accept these attacks on them like docile sheep, believing the propaganda that it makes us all safer and never asking why, if we have all these measures, we are still not safe. We do not ask why our world becomes more and more dangerous every time Blair screams for yet more powers for the police. And we resign ourselves to the knowledge that the police can kill innocent people and never be prosecuted. It is our compliance which allows these things to happen. With terrorist threats and war it is very easy for a government to convince us that these measures are necessary. It has been the trick of despots for centuries. However, I would urge our Dear Leader to exercise some caution. Today’s terrorist can be tomorrow’s leader. This happened with the “terrorist” George Washington (its interesting to think that celebrating July 4th could be construed as “glorifying terrorism”). The “terrorist” group Hamas now run the Palestinian Authority and have to be negotiated with. Would dealing them be “glorifying terrorism”? And a look at a dictionary definition of “terrorism” would reveal that our “heroic” actions in Iraq are just that … terrorism! Blair might want to bear that in mind as he glorifies those actions.

More from Craig Murray

2005-12-31T04:53:00.000Z

Craig Murray’s website is now back on-line (we still don’t know why it crashed). The story about the leaked documents has now reached many news sources around the world and is starting to reach the mainstream media including The Times, The Independent, Al Jazeera and UPI. Blairwatch grabbed some of an interview with Craig Murray on Radio 4’s PM Show. You can download the MP3 here or, if you have Real Player, go to Radio 4 to hear the interview.

Mr Murray has also passed on this message to all the bloggers who distributed the documents.

"Can I pass on my thanks to everyone who is posting the documents and making them public. You are striking a real blow for humanity and against the appalling decline in our civil liberties and standards.

We have also proved that, as long as we have good people out there, technology now makes it impossible for Western governments and political establishments to bury the truth, no matter how much they control the mainstream media."

Interestingly, he attaches another document. Nothing forbidden this time, the document is old news and already in the public domain. However, reading it in the light of recent events sheds more light on the sordid relationships between Uzbekistan, United States and the United Kingdom.

More old news

From the chatter on the web, it's clear that there are still a few diehard Bush/Blair supporters out there who believe this is about democracy and security.

I hate to disillusion such people, but everyone should be aware of this document:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/bushlay12.html

(This was released with other Enron court documents. To anyone covering
the Enron story, it meant very little. Now, however....)"

For more on this, have a look at Lenin’s Tomb where this story is handled very well and is worth reading. Also these documents help put things in context.

Secretary Rumsfeld Press Conference with President of Uzbekistan

Secretary Rumsfeld and Ambassador Jon Purnell Press Conference in Uzbekistan

The Government Strikes Back (or does it?)

2005-12-30T02:59:00.000Z

Since my last post, the website of Craig Murray (former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan) has mysteriously vanished from the internet. At this stage we do not know the cause. It’s unlikely to be just heavy traffic as the site is completely gone, but we will have more information soon. It is, of course, a huge coincidence that this happened within hours of the leaking of documents that the Government does not want anyone to see.

UPDATE (11:37pm) - Craig Murray's site is currently down. This is almost certainly a server issue, and it will be dealt with in the morning.

UPDATE(00:48) - Well, shut my mouth. Something fishy *is* going on. Details in the morning. Meantime, my advice to those who are hosting this data is as follows;
Back-up your websites... just to avoid any possible hassles. Boy, it's a good thing we hosted this in multiple locations, isn't it?
source

If it is the case that the British Government has taken out Mr Murray’s website then it would be an act stupendous futility as the story has now circled the planet several times and can be found as far away as America and New Zealand, and it is gaining momentum as it travels (it has now found its way into The Independent). Of course it could just be the case that the website crashed spectacularly after getting too many hits. But this government’s capacity for vindictiveness is legendary and it would be entirely in character for Blair to throw his dolly out of the pram. In the meantime, just to highlight the futility of trying to silence the internet, I am going to publish here some bits from Craig Murray’s website:

Here is a mirror of his post on the leaked documents:
Damning documentary evidence unveiled. Dissident bloggers in coordinated expose of UK government lies over torture. Help us beat the British government's gagging order by mirroring this information on your own site or blog!

Constituent: "This question is for Mr Straw; Have you ever read any documents where the intelligence has been procured through torturous means?"

Jack Straw: "Not to the best of my knowledge... let me make this clear... the British government does not support torture in any circumstances. Full stop. We do not support the obtaining of intelligence by torture, or its use." - Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, election hustings, Blackburn, April
2005
I was summoned to the UK for a meeting on 8 March 2003. Michael Wood gave his legal opinion that it was not illegal to obtain and to use intelligence acquired by torture... On behalf of the intelligence services, Matthew Kydd said that they found some of the material very useful indeed with a direct bearing on the war on terror. Linda Duffield said that she had been asked to assure me that my qualms of conscience were respected and understood. - Ambassador Craig Murray, memo to the Foreign Office, July 2004
In March 2003 I was summoned back to London from Tashkent specifically for a meeting at which I was told to stop protesting. I was told specifically that it was perfectly legal for us to obtain and to use intelligence from the Uzbek torture chambers.

After this meeting Sir Michael Wood, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office's legal adviser, wrote to confirm this position. This minute from Michael Wood is perhaps the most important document that has become public about extraordinary rendition. It is irrefutable evidence of the government's use of torture material, and that I was attempting to stop it. It is no wonder that the government is trying to suppress this.
The two documents in question can be viewed here and here.They can, and should be downloaded here and here.

The Nether-World

Free Burma

Alisher 'Capone' Usmanov And The Continuing Campaign

The Crisis In Burma

That Tom Wise Speech on Usmanov

The Usmanov Affair: A Quick Update

Alisher Usmanov Bit Off More Than He Could Chew When He Tried To Censor Bloggers

Bloggerheads And Other Top Blogs (Temporarily) Off-Line

September 13, 2007

Taking Liberties

Craig Murray forced to remove documents from *his* website

Murder in Samarkand - Documents:

Internet in danger part 2

The Pernicious Poison in the Government

Internet in Danger

The confusion of 'glorification'

Bad News

In Defence of Freedom

Fascist Britain

More from Craig Murray

The Government Strikes Back (or does it?)

Craig Murray forced to remove documents from his website