GCHQ and the NSA between them employ tens of thousands of people. I am bemused by the shock at the “revelation” they have been spying. What on Earth did journalists think that spies do all day? That includes electronics spies.
Since Katherine Gun revealed that we spy on other delegations – and the secretariat – within the UN building, it is hardly a shock that we spy on other governments at summits in the UK. For once, the government cannot pretend that the object is to save us all from terrorism, which is the usual catch all excuse. Nor in the real world is any of the G20 nations a military threat to the UK. The real truth of the matter is that our spies – GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 – are themselves a large and highly influential interest block within the state. Lots of people make a great deal of money out of the security state, and this kind of activity is actually simply an excuse for taking money from taxpayers – which is from everyone who has ever bought anything – and giving that money to the “security industry”.
I do not view spying on other governments as quite as despicable as spying on ordinary citizens, which is an unspeakable betrayal of the purpose of government. Spying on other governments is a game they all play to extort money each to their own security elites. But I will say that spying on the South African government seems pretty low. Why?
Interception of diplomatic communications is plainly a gross breach of the Vienna Conventions, even if the forms of communication have changed since they were drafted. I have never studied the particulars of international law as they relate to spying, but it seems to me an area that in the modern world needs regulation. There must be room here for the UN to be involved in preparing a Convention to outlaw the interception of international communications, with recourse to the International Court of Justice for those victim of it.
There is more work for the UN on Syria. We should all be grateful that Russia is holding out against the very dubious western claims that the Syrian government has deployed chemical weapons. But while Obama can declare all the red lines he wishes, they do not give any country a right to take action on Syrian soil without UN authority. That needs to be restated, strongly. There is no basis at all for the continued and massive Israeli attacks on Syria – they are absolutely illegal. Israeli strikes have definitely killed more people than the alleged deaths from chemical weapons. Can someone explain to me why that is not a red line?
The UN Secretary General should be speaking out, and the UN Security Council should be meeting, to discuss the Israeli attacks on Syria. The system of international law has broken down irretrievably.
Some links to Gillard and Rudd detailing their visits to Israel and support of Zionism.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/gillard-reassures-israel-of-backing-despite-un-vote-20121128-2ae77.html
http://www.jwire.com.au/news/images-from-gillards-israel-visit
http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Australia-FM-Rudd-due-in-Israel
http://www.countercurrents.org/polya270610.htm
Pro-war, pro-Zionist and pro-coal Rudd’s problems began when he put off his absurd and counterproductive Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) until 2013, alienating Labor voters who had elected him to “tackle climate change”.
” I wouldn’t want an echo chamber – that would drive me insane, insane, insane, insane… !”
Maybe you should take a page out of the Habbu-Clown’s book, and start posting over at Harry’s Place, and you won’t even have to do it for too long, as the way things are going around here, it’s getting increasing more like that cess-pit every day.
Yes please Suhayl, make mine a cha, something to make me sleep and dream.
@ Habbakuk, you wrote
‘If it was the moderator, I would ask him again to think carefully before pursuing this line. And it he does, he should signal that a deletion has taken place and give the reason why.’
Now, what we all accept here and respect is that this blog is not ours to do as we like.
It has survived without pre moderation and deletion was only ever used as the last possible resort against disruptive posters.
Your above response to Jon could be misconstrued as a threat, i.e ‘to think carefully before’.
Now as far as I know Jon is consideration personified and he does not deserve your insinuations.
As for informing you about deletions, further increasing the workload of Jon’s much respected voluntary service here, just because you would like to know why you have been deleted and debate it a little longer, back and forth, at tedium as we have experienced, diminishing the blog to a scrap book for a fairtale, then I’m afraid that it is not up to you to demand, but Craig to decide.
But you are welcome to raise the issue in a more collegial tone, maybe then you’ll get somewhere.
back to the issue. Saudi Arabia is increasing its supply of arms, paying for US arms shipments, whilst Syria is going shopping in Russia, both factions pouring petrol on an already explosive mix
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10121154/Syria-calls-in-Russia-to-boost-arms-supplies-to-Bashar-al-Assad.html
Suhayl, yes please, mine’s a Barry’s Gold Blend with one elaichi and just a dash of milk first please. Thanks! Got any samosas to go with it?
Jives aloo saag sounded good didn’t it? Healthy and lucky fella.
Nevermind, i didn’t see anything wrong with habby’s tone — quite plain and rational. Sure you’re not reading too much into Habby issuing a ‘threat’. It’ll take some time for the dust to settle after today’s storm, though it needn’t. Its situations like this that make you take a good look at yourself/one’s self and then respond from there. I think its been a day of honesty and at one level openness, despite the deletions which can become a bit like killing cockroaches.
But weren’t you surprised about the sock-puppeting which has so far solicited no comment from Jon? First Sofia Habbercake then Kibo noh, poetry and all and now more recently David. What next?
Poor Snow. He’s in limbo for some while, apparently.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/27/world/snowden.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
“Ecuador’s foreign minister, Ricardo Patiño, suggested to reporters at a news conference in Malaysia that his government could take months to decide whether to grant Mr. Snowden’s asylum request, and that his country’s relations with the United States would be one of the factors considered.
Mr. Patiño compared Mr. Snowden’s case to that of Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, who has been given asylum in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London.
“It took us two months to make a decision in the case of Assange, so do not expect us to make a decision sooner this time,” Mr. Patiño said, according to an Associated Press account of his remarks.
Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)
26 Jun, 2013 – 5:13 pm
Censorship on this blog:
“If it was the moderator, I would ask him again to think carefully before pursuing this line. And it he does, he should signal that a deletion has taken place and give the reason why.”
I don’t often agree with you HB, as you know, but I do on this point.
If posts are deleted the blog community, (i.e. everyone), should be told why.
Ben Franklin -Machine Gun Preacher (unleaded version)
26 Jun, 2013 – 9:31 pm
Ecuador’s foreign minister, Ricardo Patiño:
“It took us two months to make a decision in the case of Assange, so do not expect us to make a decision sooner this time…”
I can understand Ecuador’s caution; the US has form for economically undermining Latin American countries and supporting military coups.
One “Assange” is bad enough, but two?
Hopefully Snowden and friends know what they are doing.
Come on, guys, there is no way that Snowden is going to get there alive.
Assange was allowed to walk into the Ecuadorian Embassy in London with the snoops looking on.
Snowden must not do anything to increase his risks as he only has possible credibility by stating alive.
I’m sure if he makes his way to North Korea, he still is not safe as Washington could coordinate a raid on him with defusing or destroying its nuclear weapons and testing sites.
And even if he stages a real fight back, all the compliant loons here and elsewhere will be quick to respond: Oh yes, he would claim that for his minders, wouldn’t he!
“It took us two months to make a decision in the case of Assange, so do not expect us to make a decision sooner this time,” Mr. Patiño said, according to an Associated Press account of his remarks.”
I hope he’s not forced to hang around the transit area of an airport in the meantime. Not the most comfortable place to be. But at least he’s alive, as far as we know.
———————-
“If posts are deleted the blog community, (i.e. everyone), should be told why.”
Yep, glad to see we have agreement on that.
I half expected to see a note from Jon or Craig when I got here, but no.
———————–
Suhayl, I would love to have had some tea, thanks. But I have people arriving from overseas and I’m busy. I’ll likely be tied up until after the weekend.
————————
My font has gone all weird. Everything inside this box has got smaller while everything outside it (on the screen) has got huge. And I do mean huge! And no, I haven’t fiddled with settings. Those damn fairies …
Dreoilin,
“But I have people arriving from overseas and I’m busy.”
So that’s where Ed Snowden is!
:.)
Ah now Jives
That’d be telling
🙂
I need to go off and have an egg or something. Busy day ahead.
“I hope he’s not forced to hang around the transit area of an airport in the meantime. Not the most comfortable place to be.”
Oh I’m sure the FSB will take good care of him.
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2007/russia0307/5.htm
Hi all. Since this thread is ancient and lengthy, I’ll put a few points down. It is meant, I assure you, in the spirit of keeping healthy discussion and civil disagreement alive here.
I have many times proposed a basic posting/moderation policy to Craig, and had no response. Thus, the suggestion that I am not bothered about it is simply not true – I am trying. My personal view is that the light touch we have had around here no longer works, and as I said earlier the reasons for the that may be difficult to untangle. But, we are where we are.
The deletions are, as far as I know, all mine. The policy for the time being, in absence of there being a policy, is that posts made for the purpose of attacking another poster will be deleted. This goes for newcomers as well as old hands, and although no-one is unbiased, I shall try to be even-handed. Posts from people who disagree with the liberal principles of the blog are welcome, as Craig has often made clear. People are welcome to disagree with Craig and with each other.
Pre-registration is not going to happen, Craig is opposed to it. It has been floated and rejected many times before.
I apologise to anyone who is frustrated about their post being deleted, but if you see the stream that I do, you might understand (each bullet is a snippet of a separate comment from the Trash folder from this thread):
etc etc. It really is a stream of unpleasantness, and serves no decent purpose. I have not deleted a single comment that was about actual politics (and the cups of tea requests, which are welcome!).
Thus, my deletions are not censorship – as one poster said, some of this dynamic is comparable to Shell disrupting Greenpeace meetings with a megaphone. It simply has to be unacceptable, and to say so – hopefully! – ought not invite silly comparisons with North Korea.
Thank you to the posters who have shown some patience and restraint. I understand that these threads can get heated, but equally everyone needs to be able to step away when this happens. I should make it clear that I have seen threats of physical violence, signs of severe stress, threats of suicide, tears, depression and the rest on this very site – the words we say have, sometimes, a real effect in the real world. Please bear that in mind when you post.
The point about traceability of deletions is a fair one, however it is worth being aware a little bit about how WordPress works. Previously Clark and I scrupulously would edit a comment, replacing the text with a deletion reason. However, this unfortunately erases the content of the comment, whilst ‘trashing’ a comment preserves it, and just hides it from the page. Thus, removing a comment can be undone, whereas an edited one cannot.
This problem can be fixed with some development work, but we are shortly to move servers, which will necessitate half a weekend day’s effort, and there is only so much that unpaid volunteers can do. I don’t participate in threads much anyway, since I am fed up of the negativity, and occasionally I get it in the neck too (“I see you don’t have the good manners to respond, Jon” etc etc).
With that in mind I should be grateful if people do not make appeals to the moderator in comments. In general, people are able to rub along quite well, and if something needs to be removed, it will usually be spotted. If we miss something, then that’s not the end of the world. (Serious problems such as openly racist posts can be reported to Craig using the contact page – that sends him an email, so I don’t see those).
On reflection, I am restoring a couple of comments on this thread (regarding moderation and behaviour) that were caught in the crossfire.
Since this thread is dead, I won’t stop further civil points about comment policy, though to be honest I’d rather everyone just talked about politics – surely the purpose of the site! I will drop in once a day or so, as usual, though I don’t plan to get drawn into a long exchange. For the time being, I regard moderation as being in a holding pattern until Craig decides how it should work.
“And as for “beating-up on a woman” — there’s a simple solution to that. If Mary can’t take the heat, she should get out of the kitchen.”
If I had the same sad inclination to stalk you for months on this Blog, incessantly insulting & mocking you under the most hypocritical & flimsiest of justifications, I doubt you yourself would enjoy it much, or indeed would show the same fortitude as Mary.
By the way, nice bit of sexist metaphor there, and a nice bit of womanly solidarity also, next you will be saying she asked for it because her comments are often revealing !
Forget the egg, and find those lemons I recommended for you.
Thanks, Jon, for the work you do, and the explanation you made about dealing with the recent personal attacks.
Hope the offenders got the message, and mend their ways. Expecting you or someone else to explain why their worst efforts are gone is a bit much.
I personally favor your light hand in all tis, but it still is a hand.
Thanks very much Jon. That made for interesting reading.
“My personal view is that the light touch we have had around here no longer works, and as I said earlier the reasons for the that may be difficult to untangle. But, we are where we are.”
I agree with the first part, and would venture to suggest that a reason for the second part may lie in the fact that shorty after this Blog made the news as the third most popular political blog, it attracted the sabotaging participation of new Poster(s).
“I don’t participate in threads much anyway, since I am fed up of the negativity”
Exactly, and of course not only you; proof that the sabotaging is working .
“the words we say have, sometimes, a real effect in the real world. Please bear that in mind when you post.”
The most important part of what you said, then needs constant highlighting.
Sorry, Macky, but you lost me by mentioning new porters whose negativity, caused apparently by the site’s new status, seems to be working.
Who are these new posters, and examples of effective negativity?
Don’t think you are talking about me, and while I am generally disappointed in what other posters say about our most crappy world, I don’t stop despite my allusions of leaving because they are always followed by my finding something new which keeps me going, like Snowden was a hawk until as late as February 2009.
And my efforts keep getting more exposure as google has upped my pages of possible connections from around 20 to 171. I did not know until now about the growing popularity of this blog – and it certainly wouldn’t have affected my output – but it certainly seems to be having an increasingly positive effect.
“Don’t think you are talking about me”
No, I’m not; the clue is in the words “shorty after this Blog made the news as the third most popular political blog, it attracted the sabotaging participation of new Poster(s)”; this Blog was in the news in Sept 2012, a certain disruptive Poster first appeared on “Savile and the Low Hanging Fruit” a few weeks later.
Jon (the censor) said – “..my deletions are not censorship.”
Ermm.. Yes they are! Look up the definition and come back to me with a rebuttal. You can try to bullshit your way out of this Jon, but you are doing this for a purpose and not for the ostensible purpose you claim.
You posted a list of out-of-context “snippets” to justify your interdiction but we all know that taking words out of context is self-serving. Especially when you allow a comment with a reference to “Habbacunt” to stand, uncensored.
Jon, why does the comments section exist? For what purpose? To farm crowd-sourced approval of Craig’s political posts?
You state that “People are welcome to disagree with Craig and each other”. Really? So why the selective censorship? We already know it’s not balanced, despite the squawking of censorship apologists.
I look forward to a comprehensive statement from Craig explaining his use of our comments to support his political activism and how we are to engage with each other in a CODIFIED way. In the meantime, if our comments are going to be exploited to provide political support for Craig’s posts, I trust that you will do the morally right thing and not censor them like we are led to believe takes place in disreputable publications and despotic regimes.
This just to show what one has to put up with in Norfolk. This is the non football section of the Pink Un, a hotbed of Canary fans who now and then get bored over politics.
This from JG on the subject of Edward Snowden and the NSA/GCHQ spying on us issue. we clash over issues such as immigration and religion and and….often, JG thinks that he’s the police man on the Pink’Un. His rider is priceless.
“I have been thinking about all this Big Brother malarky and have come to the conclusion that it’s a good thing.
I believe that everyone should be micro-chipped as it has huge advantages;
If you are in an accident and have no ID on you the paramedics just need to scan your microchip to retrieve your medical details from the NHS database.
If the microchips are linked into Satellite trackers crime would be reduced overnight and all those illegal immigrants would not be able to move without being rounded up and deported.
I don’t know why the Government does not push ahead with this technology, as a law-abiding citizen I’m all for it.
——————————————————-
Everything that has transpired has done so according to my design.
Jemand, before you got caught up in slanging matches, you used to be one of the posters I looked out for. Your views often differ from mine but you argue your point well and when you stick to the subject, you usually give me, at least, pause for thought. I genuinely like to read opinions which intelligently challenge my own. The world view I’ve been evolving since birth progresses faster under stress.
But now I skim your posts and don’t stop if I see insulting comment directed at others. Jon’s doing you a favour by deleting them – they don’t do you any credit.
I wouldn’t bother spelling this out to most of the disruptive posters. Some would be pleased with the attention and it would encourage them to continue. Some are trying to damage this blog and others, because they can’t stop themselves, or can’t see it, or don’t care, are doing just as much damage. I think, I hope, that you are better than that. How about leaving out the personal stuff – beat ’em to pulp with your intellect instead? You, me, the blog, we all win.
Jon; I thank you for doing your level-best to keep the fire under control.
It makes the thread rather cryptic when deletions occur, but it’s sometimes the only recourse.
Self-moderation is something we could all practice more often.
Jon thank you for taking the time to explain things, and please accept my thanks for your hard work. It clearly is one of those jobs where you are damned if you do, and damned if you don’t. Maybe you should go and referee a few premier league football games for some light relief 🙂
We have sufficient ‘scrums’ on Craigs blog, KoWN 🙂
One can easily see where Jemand is coming from and he’s supported his argument with a disgraceful example. In other words that particular word dis-graces the *WHOLE* of this blog, excuse the pun.
I think Jon himself should engage a little more with commenter’s feedback so that moderation is not just explained but seen to be explained.
After reading such a long, overtly comprehensive explanation from Jon, not a peep from Jon about sock-puppeting. This after a few months ago he disclosed in an explanation that my IP was afar away from another’s. He could have denied sock-puppeting without having to go into detail. Now somehow its ok!? I have no problem with that, not my blog if Jon and Craig are happy about that practice, good luck! But i observe in present awareness, this blog is already degenerating in front of one’s eyes.
The pragmatic answer may be that Jon doesn’t have enough time. IF so, Craig needs to solve this — if its worth doing then its worth doing properly or not at all.
I await again to hear Jon’s views re sock puppeting — its sort of my 5th request but he’s ignoring it for obscure reasons.
Villager; I’m not sure how the sitemeter works but normally it’s a royal pain in the arse to filter through, find the time of the comment and the IP. If you aren’t watching it 24/7 stuff slips through.
Just sayin.
Dead right Ben and am not looking for perfection. Just as you know in the last days Sofia Habber/Kibo Noh outed herself with a little help fom me and has now brazenly reappeared as ‘David’. Jon has made NO COMMENT despite a detailed legthy explanation of deletions. So all should assume that its a free for all on that front hereon. Or is it a selective wink and a nod. There is no third explanation.
Thanks for being helpful and stay well.
Villager:
Sock puppeting is frowned upon if its purpose is to deceive.
Your complaints about Kibo Noh (alias Sophie et al) have rightfully been ignored because his purpose is to deflate a bullying windbag with humour. There is no deception intended and his motivation is clear – to protect the blog whilst having a laugh and giving the rest of us one too. He often flags up his alter egos as being his own creations, and if that’s weren’t enough, his distinctive style is unmistakeable. Far from it being a triumphal piece of detective work on your part to see through this master of disguises, you were probably the last one to work it out.
Click Ctrl+F, enter ‘Villager,’ and keep clicking ‘next’ till you’ve read every mention of your name on this page. Then tell me if your contribution to this blog is positive or negative.
P.S. Kibo isn’t David