Somalian al-Shabab militants execute two girls for alleged spying

Somalians Ayan Mohamed Jama, 18, and Huriyo Ibrahim, 15, were executed by the Islamist al-Shabab militia on Wednesday after being found guilty of spying for the government.

During their trial, no evidence was produced, and they were not allowed legal representation.

Al-Shabab militiamen ordered all residents of the city of Beledweyne, where the trial took place, to observe the execution by firing squad.

According to the Guardian, the public punishments are intended to restore security in areas under their control as well as creating a climate of fear so locals are too terrified to show dissent or offer support to the government.

A resident told the New York Times: "When the fighting started between the Shabab and the government forces just outside Beledweyne, the girls had to flee to the bush, where they were finally caught.

"I think they were executed because they were caught at the front line."

Shabaab fighters are trying to overthrow the weak UN-backed Somalian government, which has condemned the executions.

Human Rights Watch describe Al-Shabaab’s punishments as "unrelenting repression and brutality".

Recently, Al-Shabaab militants cut off the leg and hand of schoolboy Ismael Khalif Abdulle for being an alleged spy and thief.

Abdulle was not told of his alleged crime until the 26th day of his detention. In an even sicker twist, his leg was cut shorter after Somalia commander Shangole said the amputation took place "too low down".

Domestic violence in comedy

I'm a big fan of the classic sitcom Dad's Army, and tonight watched the episode Man Hunt.

One part of the episode shocked me. Here is some background.

After Private Walker tells Captain Mainwaring he gave a parachute he found to a man to make into knickers, Mainwaring, Wilson and Walker embark on a farcial mission to find a pair of knickers so they can check whether the parachute was British (white) or German (cream)

When the trio knock at one house, a man answers and slams the door when asked by Private Walker whether he can see his wife's knickers.

He then proceeds to go upstairs and starts hitting his wife, while the camera focuses on the bemused faces of the three Home Guard officers.

Disturbingly, the audience at the time seemed to find this little scene hilarious instead of rather shocking, with guffaws of laughter as if Private Walker had ended up with the knickers on his head.

It is also interesting to note that the Home Guard officers do not seem bothered by the fact that a man is hitting his wife because of their silliness. Rather than break down the door and try him or at least run to find a telephone and call the police, they simply move on to the next house.

A sign of the difference in attitudes between 1969 and now I suppose, but still a rather foul little episode in an otherwise delightful comedy.

I am not usually a fan of censorship and I am glad the episode was shown uncut, as it shows the difference made by forty one years of feminism to popular culture.

David Cameron the benefit scrounger?

As Hopi Sen points out, it is rather ironic that David Cameron is so angry about housing claims of over £20,000 a year when his second home expense claims have often been above this amount.

David Cameron's second home expenses:

2003-04: £20,328,

2004-05: £20,902;

2005-06: £21,293.86;

2006-07: £20,563.

As reported in the Daily Telegraph:

Of course, public money shouldn't be used to ensure people have more comfortable lifestyles than others.

Mr Cameron's claim of £680 for repairs to his cottage, including clearing wisteria and vines from a chimney, replacing outside lights and resealing his conservatory roof, does rather deviate from this rule.

Happily, he has now paid this money back, although I doubt someone claiming too much Job Seekers Allowance or Housing Benefit would be able to get away with just paying the money back.

Iain Duncan Smith, by contrast, claimed the following second home expenses:

2004-05: £855

2005-06: £1,528

2006-07: £566

2007-08: £0.

These seem reasonable, but unlike most people in receipt of public money he has a salary of £64,746.

2nd November tube strike to go ahead

Unless a very late deal is agreed on Monday, the third in a series of tube strikes over plans to cut 800 ticket office staff will take place from 7pm on Tuesday November 2nd until 9pm on Wednesday November 3rd.

The Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) has been mediating, but unions adjourned the talks after London Underground said they did not want to discuss pay and grading, according to ChiswickW4.

Rail, Maritime and Transport union members in the former Metronet Grades will walk out at 7pm on Tuesday, while all other RMT members will walk out at 9pm Tuesday.

Services are unlikely to return to normal schedules until Thursday November 4th.

Use Tfl's Journey Planner to find an alternate route.

Protests at Vodafone stores on Saturday 30th October over alleged unpaid £6bn tax

Vodafone stores across the United Kingdom will be shut down by demonstrators tomorrow over an alleged unpaid tax bill of £6 billion.

This day of action follows a demonstration on Wednesday 27th where the Oxford Street store was closed, and the shutting down of all three stores in Leeds city centre on Thursday 28th.

UK Uncut have produced a map of actions against Vodafone around the UK.

Londoners will be meeting at Speakers' Corner, Hyde Park at 11am tomorrow before breaking out into groups to close down any stores in Central London.

Other actions will be taking place in Glasgow, Liverpool, Brighton, Edinburgh, Oxford and Weymouth.

Allegations against Vodafone:

The allegations against the mobile phone company were originally published in Private Eye back in September:

When Vodafone bought German engineering company Mannesmann a decade ago for €180bn, it desperately wanted to use the mother of all tax avoidance schemes so taxpayers would subsidise what turned out to be a massively over-priced mistake.

The plan was to route the acquisition through an offshore company.

This, however, would potentially fall foul of British anti-tax avoidance laws, and when the company asked the then Inland Revenue to clear the arrangement, it duly refused.

Vodafone went ahead anyway and bought Mannesmann using a Luxembourg subsidiary company called Vodafone Investments Luxembourg sarl (VIL), in which it would go on to dump vast profits taxed at less than 1 percent...

There are also allegations that Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC) head Dave Hartnett agreed a deal to let the mobile phone company off £6 billion of tax.

Vodafone's rebuttal:

It should be noted that Vodafone deny that they owe £6 billion in tax. A spokesperson told Mobile News: "The amount of money we had provided in our accounts to satisfy our auditors if there was a risk we had to pay a tax bill was £2.2 billion. Earlier this year we agreed to settle this case with HMRC for £1.25 billion.

"The idea we had a bill waived is not the case. It is incorrect to suggest there was ever an outstanding tax bill of £6 billion. That was never the case."

UK Uncut say: "This day of action is aimed at being inclusive and open to absolutely anyone who is angry at the cuts! They are not fair, we are not all in this together and we will not pay for their crisis! There are alternatives – start by collecting instead of wiping off corporate tax bills. Let’s show them what the Big Society can really do."


You can see a video from Wednesday's protest below:

One law for benefit cheats...another for Baronesses

Private Eye's Number Crunching reports:

3 years for which benefit cheats will have payments halted under new rules

1.5 years for which Baroness Uddin has been suspended from the House of Lords for wrongly claiming £125,000 of taxpayers' money.

Benefit cheats are indefensible, but I find it astonishing that someone who tries to claim such a large amount of public money that they are not entitled to is allowed to stay a Lord - perhaps they are taking their cue from the other house.

Baroness Uddin, along with Lord Paul, and Cross-bencher Lord Bhatia, was suspended last week for fraudulant expenses.

Her original suspension of three years was reduced by the Lords’ Conduct Committee.

Lord Bhatia’s suspension was reduced from a year to eight months by the committee, and Lord Paul’s from six months to four.

The miscreants were also told that they did not need to apologise.

Once she returns from suspension, Lady Uddin will be entitled to claim parliamentary expenses again, including a new £300 day attendance allowance, although the Conduct Committee are able to attach an order to her allowances, meaning that she would forfeit the money.

£300 a day is a lot more than most people in Britain, such as paramedics and cleaners, recieve for a day's work.

The Clash sum it up best in This Is England:

Large parts of Britain's forests to be sold off

Around half of the 1.85 million acres(748,000 hectares)of woodland owned by the Forestry Commission, the government responsible for protecting Britain's forests and woodlands, will be sold off.

Caroline Spelman, the Environment Secretary, is expected to announce this in the next few days, according to reports in the Independent and the Daily Telegraph.

The sale will pave the way for more developments such as golf courses and holiday resorts, although some of the land will be given to charities and community groups. Laws dating back to Magna Carta may have to be rewritten to allow the privatisation.

One third of the land to be disposed of will be sold between 2011 and 2015, and the rest is expected to be sold by 2020.

Allan MacKenzie, the secretary of the Forestry Commission Trade Unions, told the Independent: "We will oppose any land sale. Once we've sold it, it never comes back.

"Once it is sold, restrictions are placed on the land which means the public don't get the same access to the land. The current system means a vast amount of people can enjoy forests and feel ownership of them."

Mark Avery, conservation director for the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) told the Daily Telegraph: "You can understand why this Government would think 'why does the state need to be in charge of growing trees', because there are lots of people who make a living from growing trees.

"But the Forestry Commission does more than just grow trees. A lot of the work is about looking after nature and landscapes.

"We would be quite relaxed about the idea of some sales, but would be unrelaxed if the wrong bits were up for sale like the New Forest, Forest of Dean or Sherwood Forest, which are incredibly valuable for wildlife and shouldn't be sold off

"We would look very carefully at what was planned. It would be possible to sell 50 per cent if it was done in the right way."

Maison Michel Picard sells 600 bottles of wine to North Korean dictatorship

Despite concerns by the United Nations that North Korea is heading for a "chronic" new food crisis, the Kim regime purchased 600 bottles of wine from French producer Maison Michel Picard in July.

Francine Picard revealed the news at Seoul Finance Center today, saying, "On average, we do approximately one transaction with North Korea per year, and while the quantity is small, we maintain a good relationship with them."

"This July too, a North Korean government representative bought 600 bottles of high end wine including Chassagne-Montrachet and Échezeaux Grand Cru," Picard explained, adding, “These wines sell for between 310,000 and 400,000 won in Europe."

The Daily NK highlights that the sale may violate UN Security Council Resolution 1718, which forbids the export of "luxury goods" by any UN member state to North Korea.

Via Mick Hartley.

I suggest boycotting Maison Michel Picard for dealing with a disgusting dictatorship.

DRC rebel leader Callixte Mbarushimana charged with crimes against humanity

French police have arrested alleged rebel leader Callixte Mbarushimana on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

Mbarushimana, the executive secretary of the Rwandan Hutu Forces Démocratiques pour la Libération du Rwanda (FDLR), is accused of helping to attack DRC civilians population in order to create a humanitarian catastrophe, as well as using violence against civilians to obtain power for the FDLR, according to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

He is charged with five charges of crimes against humanity and six war crimes charges for murders, rapes, torture and destruction of property in the eastern Congo during 2009.

"You will be punished",a report by Human Rights Watch accused the FDLR of killing more than 700 civilians in the first nine months of 2009.

Mbarushimana carried on working for the United Nations until his arrest in 2001 and the United Nations Administrative Tribunal voted to give him 13 months' back pay, despite New Zealand attorney Tony Grieg claiming he had linked the rebel leader to the murder of fellow U.N. workers in the 1994 Rwandan genocide, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

Géraldine Mattioli-Zeltner, international justice advocate at Human Rights Watch, commented: "Civilians in eastern Congo have endured terrible suffering inflicted by various armed groups for many years. The arrest of Callixte Mbarushimana sends a powerful message that those responsible for horrific crimes will face justice no matter where they try to hide."

ICC Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo told Uganda's Independent: "We are grateful to the French authorities for executing the arrest warrant and we are thankful for the excellent cooperation of the many parties involved in the investigation, including France, Germany, the DRC and Rwanda."

Mbarushimana was arrested in Paris, where he has lived since he obtained refugee status in 2003.

Congolese general still at large:

Congolese army general Bosco Ntaganda,wanted by the ICC on charges of enlisting, conscripting, and using child soldiers in Ituri in 2002-2003, is still at large.

The Congolese minister of justice and human rights, Luzolo Bambi, has publicly stated that Ntaganda would not be arrested because he is needed to preserve peace and stability in the eastern Congo. Human rights groups have protested this.

London transport fares to rise

Travelling in London will become more experience after a 21% cut to a direct grant from the Department for Transport (DfT).

This grant makes up one-third of Transport for London's funding.

Boris Johnson's comments that "Today is the culmination of months of hard negotiations with the Government and I am pleased that they have recognised the immense importance of protecting investment in the capital" seem rather hollow.

Fare rises on London's transport

The Oyster pay as you go bus and tram fare will rise by 10p to £1.30, meaning a return journey will now cost £2.60, a lot of money for the poorest people in London.

Cash bus and tram fare prices will rise from £2 to £2.20.

Oyster pay as you go tube, DLR and Overground journeys from Zones 1-6 that include Zone 1 will all rise by between 10p and 30p per journey.

Oyster pay as you go tube, DLR and Overground journeys excluding Zone 1 that go across two zones will rise by 10p, which those excluding Zone 1 that go across four or five zones will rise by 30p.

Weekly Travelcards that include Zone 1 will rise by around £3 each, while weekly Travelcards excluding Zone will rise by between £1 and £2 each.

Monthy Travelcard prices are not mentioned by Tfl.

Oyster card deposits will rise from £3 to £5. This is intended to prevent cards with negative pay as you go balances being disposed of, according to Transport for London, but this measure will annoy a lot of tourists.

Tfl's press release, including a table of pay as you go and weekly travelcard fare rises.

Boris Johnson and his wonderful bus

It seems that a meeting between Boris Johnson and Eric Pickles, meant to discuss London's Dft budget and therefore fight to protect London's transport, may not have taken place, according to the Department of Communities and Local Government.

Still, I'm sure that minimum wage workers in London struggling to afford the increased bus and tube prices will be delighted that so much money was wasted on a new bus for London by their instead of avoiding fare rises.

They can sing "The fares on the bus go up and up" or at least the resident top deck yobs can blare it out of tinny speakers while chucking litter on the floor.

England's dreaming

The vicious cuts announced in today's Comprehensive Spending Review give the lie to the idea that "we are all in it together."

Extra cuts to welfare, made in order that the Coalition can say they saved other departments, will hit the most vulnerable people in society, many of whom will have lost their jobs as a result of the public sector cuts.

With unemployment rising, and the welfare budget cut, will there be enough money to pay unemployment benefits? Will we see a huge rise in crime, at a time when there will have to be some cuts in frontline policing, due to people needing to break the law to clothe and feed themselves?

Disabled people who have been judged well enough to work, at a time when there is still discrimination against disabled people in the workplace and at job interviews, will lose their contributory Employment and Support Allowance after one year. Many will never recover.

People supporting the cuts say there are no alternatives, and we must take our medicine, but only when the cuts do not affect them.

It was bleakly amusing to see many people who cheered on the housing benefit and public sector cuts reacting in fury at the child benefit cuts, horrified that the cuts might actually hit them.

There are so many alternatives, some of which identified on the Spending Challenger website. Sadly, the Spending Challenge is now over and the results have not yet been published on data.gov.uk.

Had one of the two new aircraft carriers that will not be carrying planes for a decade been axed, we would not have needed to make these brutal cuts in welfare.

Still, tens of thousands of people may be being pushed further into poverty but at least we've got two new aircraft carriers. Maybe unemployed people will be forced to clean them each day for minimum wage.

Sadly, mass protests will not happen until the cuts really begin to hit Middle England, if they ever do. Perhaps the upper middle classes will simply ghettoise themselves so we end up with commuter-belt fortresses while inner city areas turn into shanty towns.

Twenty years ago, we had the Poll Tax riots. Twenty-five years ago, we had the Miner's Strike. The idea that the majority of British people are apathetic is a relatively new one, and to some extent a self-fulfilling one.

If enough people claim that the British public will simply accept the cuts, people will believe there is no chance of building a mass movement, and we get weedy little marches to Downing Street (this is not a criticism of the people involved) instead of mass protests like the French, one again proving themselves a far more civilised nation.

The main opposition to the cuts, the Labour Party, is pathetic.

I have more sympathy with the Labour Party than the coalition, but when Ed Miliband attacks David Cameron on child benefit cuts for the middle classes after saying he "will work with him" on all other benefits, it is clear that the Labour Party is terrified of losing the Middle England vote.

The Labour Party do not dare, for example, to suggest road pricing on motorways as a way of raising money, for fear of offending the motoring lobby.

Nor do they suggest raising taxes on the better off, who of course deserve all that money unlike the silly poor, who'd only spend it on trampolines (according to Harry Hill), alcopops or an X-Box.

Alan Johnson seems to have some kind of common touch as Chancellor, but how much economic experience? (And yes I am aware that George Osbourne has very little as well). As for Ed Miliband, he is uninspiring and not in touch with the common man. He wouldn't lead a protest, he'd sit and drink tea with a focus group.

We don't even have the counterculture to console ourselves. The Seventies saw the Sex Pistols and the Eighties Billy Bragg. Today we have X-Factor winners, Snow Patrol and Katy Perry.

Where once we had Spitting Image, the best we have now is a single (although excellent) sketch from the latest episode of Harry and Paul.

I am furious about the direction my country is headed in. I may not always enjoy living in Britain, but this is the country where most of my friends and most of my family live.

And I feel so impotent. I want to show my opposition to the cuts and the Coalition's divisive ideology but all I can do is write this blog post.

The title of my post refers to a lyric from God Save The Queen by the Sex Pistols: "There is no future in England's dreaming." And if you think that you won't be affected by these cuts, or that Britain will recover from them, you are dreaming.

Mark Steel is a must-read on this, writing in today's Independent:

It's often claimed that protest doesn't make any difference. But then why have the French retained pensions and services and a working week (without the country falling apart) that few people here could aspire to? You can understand why a population feels unable to confront unfairness, if it's up against the North Korean army or the dictatorships of China or Zimbabwe. But surely we can't allow every public service to be dismantled and the poorest 90 per cent of the population to be wrung dry with no opposition, and say: "Well what could we do? I mean, never mind Mugabe or Kim Jong-Il, we were up against Vince Cable."

More reactions to the Comprehensive Spending Review.

Manchester paramedics face half hour wait to drop of patients

Paramedics delivering patients to Tameside General Hospital and the Manchester Royal Infirmary have had to wait half an hour on average as hospitals are so busy, the Manchester Evening News reports.

With Central Manchester Hospitals NHS Trust, which runs Manchester Royal Infirmary, announcing that up to 1,400 jobs could go, things could get even worse.

A three per cent increase in emergency calls last month compared to the same time in 2009 has been cited as part of the problem.

Perhaps charging people who call an ambulance for minor injuries could reduce some of the pressure.

A long term solution needs to be found as lives are being put at risk.

Uzbek journalist Abdumalik Boboev fined for slander

Uzbek reporter Abdumalik Boboev, a freelancer for the radio station Voice of America (VOA), has been found guilty of criminal defamation, insult, and preparing or distributing materials that threaten public security and order.

A charge of illegial border crossing was dropped.

Boboev has been fined the equivalent of about $10,000 by the Mirzo-Ulugbek District Criminal Court,according to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

The charges were brought in July after the State Press and Information Agency's Mass Media Monitoring Center (UzASI) reviewed articles on the Vesti.uz website.

The indictment against Berezovskii claimed the media monitoring center's expert had concluded that 16 articles published on Vesti.uz between August 2009 and January 2010 were defamatory and introduced "to the Uzbek population defamatory, misleading and misinformed information, the distribution of which could incite interethnic and inter-state hostility and create panic among the population."

Berezovskii claims he did not write these articles, but that the articles were previously published on Russian news websites and simply re-posted on Vesti.uz.

This claim is supported by several news agencies, who issued statements to the court that the articles were theirs.

Allison Gill, a Europe and Central Asia adviser at Human Rights Watch, comments: "Berezovskii was convicted on allegations of insult and libel that should have never made their way to the courtroom in the first place...The Uzbek authorities should immediately stop their relentless campaign against free speech and independent expression."

More at Human Rights Watch.

Earlier this week, before the outcome of the trial had been announced, the Broadcasting Board of Governors passed a motion condeming the actions of the Uzbek government:

"The Broadcasting Board of Governors wishes to express its grave concern with the Uzbek government’s attempt to silence Mr Boboev and his objective reporting for the Voice of America and the state of media freedom in Uzbekistan. Using the criminal justice system to punish journalists for freely expressed views is contrary to Uzbekistan’s international obligations and has a chilling effect on journalists throughout the country.

"The Broadcasting Board of Governors calls upon Uzbekistan to drop the charges against Mr Boboev and cease all interference with the right of journalists in Uzbekistan to gather and report information freely."

Thames Valley University to change name despite trademark issues

Despite the deep budget cuts that we are likely to see in higher education on October 20th, universities are still wasting money on rebranding.

Private Eye notes the University of Southampton (£160,000) and the Central School of Speech and Drama (£40,000) as examples of brand-obsessed vanity. (As if a new logo makes any difference to student application numbers).

The magazine highlights perhaps the most ludicrous case, Thames Valley University changing its name to the University of West London.

Thames Valley University has already spent £50,000 on the creation of a new logo in consultation with staff and students, and will need to spend money changing stationary and signage.

However, Private Eye claims that the trademark "University of West London" is owned by Brunel University, which is based in Uxbridge, North-West London.

The magazine reports that an internal TVU memo told staff last week that discussions with Brunel University on letting the university use its new name are "progressing well".

Vice-Chancellor Professor Peter John said: "This is a natural progression for TVU which is now a very different institution to that which was granted university status in 1992.

"The name change is necessary in order to align our new direction of travel with our clear brand and geographical identity which now lies at the heart of west London focusing on our two campuses in Ealing and Brentford."

Perhaps Thames Valley University would have been better off asking students to design a new logo,which would have saved money, and choosing a trademark not owned by another university.

Clearly, the fact that most of the university's courses are not in the Thames
Valley means a name change is needed. Did it have to be so expensive or cack-handed, though?

Potential alternative names: Ealing and Brentford University, Occidens University (Occidens is Latin for West, and one could have Occidens Londinum University, but it sounds a bit pig Latin).

Why are Thames Valley University students not protesting about the huge amount of money spent on the new logo, as well as the need to spend more money on changing stationary and signage?

The Student Union website links to the Demo-lition protest over education cuts, so surely some students must have an interest in how their university will cope.

Reggae orchestra to play in Bristol on 31st October

The St Paul's Reggae Orchestra, which debuted in March, will be performing at the St George's concert hall, Bristol, on Sunday October 31st.

The performance begins at 8pm and tickets are £4.99, with a £1 suggested donation towards St George's.

St Paul's Reggae Orchestra, which has 35 members, was created by St Paul's Learning and Family Centre in partnership with St George's as part of the Migration Project.

Tickets can be purchased by calling 0845 40 20 001 or online.

A video from the March performance is below:



Venue Magazine comments: "The band swoop in with the precision of a swing orchestra on holiday in Jamaica. It's one of Bristol's most exciting music projects."

St George's Bristol is located in Bristol's West End, just off Park Street. Buses 1, 8, 8A, 9, 9A go to the venue from Bristol Temple Meads station. There are also many taxi ranks near the venue.

Kyrgyzstan election yields no clear winner

Negotiations to form a coalition government will begin between five parties in the central Asian republic of Kyrgyzstan, after the country's first democratic elections.

The nationalist Ata-Zhurt party had 8.63% of the vote, the highest share, while the pro-government Social Democratic Party and pro-Moscow Ar-Namys party won 7.97 and 7.11% respectively , the Sydney Morning Herald reports.

The opposition Republic Party had 7.07%, and the pro-government faction Ata-Meken, which had been expected to take first place, 5.93%.

Turnout was 56.59%.

President Roza Otunbayeva, who came to power four months after a popular revolt which removed her predecessor President Kurmanbek Bakiyev, told Pakistan's DAWN.com: “Our people do not suffer from amnesia. Our people know their history. They will rise quickly to create a parliamentary republic and protect it themselves."

Both Russian and the United States have air bases in Kyrgyzstan. Russia opposes the democratic elections, arguing they could lead to increased violence, while the USA supports them.

Microsoft corporate VP wants virus-infected computers to be quarantined

Corporate vice-president Scott Charney has posted an entry on the Microsoft On The Issues blog calling for virus-infected computers to be disconnected from the Internet until they can be verified as safe.

The key paragraph is below:

Just as when an individual who is not vaccinated puts others’ health at risk, computers that are not protected or have been compromised with a bot put others at risk and pose a greater threat to society.

In the physical world, international, national, and local health organizations identify, track and control the spread of disease which can include, where necessary, quarantining people to avoid the infection of others.

Simply put, we need to improve and maintain the health of consumer devices connected to the Internet in order to avoid greater societal risk.

To realize this vision, there are steps that can be taken by governments, the IT industry, Internet access providers, users and others to evaluate the health of consumer devices before granting them unfettered access to the Internet or other critical resources.

One could see this as a way to garner more publicity for Microsoft, but assuming the post wasn't intended just for marketing and linkbait for the Microsoft on the Issues site, I am opposed to this proposal.

The danger that computer viruses do should not be underestimated. They do not just cause problems with a local machine but can generate billions of spam emails and website attacks.

However, cutting people off from the internet is a draconian solution that presents several problems.

People who cannot afford expensive antivirus software are able to download free versions. The only one I would recommend, which I have used in the past, is AVG.

If people are disconnected from the internet, they will be unable to download free antivirus software and therefore unable to remove viruses without paying a lot of money.

Even paid for antivirus software may need to connect to the internet the first time it is run, perhaps in order to verify the product or check for updates.

Also, there is the question of who disconnects the computer and then verifies it is safe. I presume the ISP has responsibility for the former (which will mean increased costs for the computer passed onto the consumer, therefore higher broadband costs), but who does the latter? Is it once again the ISP or will contractors do this?

EastFinchleyite on the Guardian website has a better solution which addresses some of these concerns:

The ISPs should be made to detect the flow of virus carrying data (messages, web pages etc) and cleanse them. At the same time they should slow down (not stop) the internet link to the infected machine, they are very good at that already.

Then send daily messages with web links to online virus cleansing programmes such as Kaspersky. That's the stick, the carrot is you get your fast internet link back when clean.

It is all available now. There is just no money in doing it.

The final sentence highlights a key issue. If there is no money to be made for the ISP's, why should they comply? Could laws be passed to make them do so? Would this not alienate a majority of politicians and consumers?

One also has to consider the effect on commerce, given that a business might have to schedule time for machines to be given a safety check. Staff may be unable to work while their Internet is down.

Alan Bentley, a senior vice president at business computer security firm Lumension, told the Guardian:

Suggesting that infected PCs should be quarantined until a clean-up job is complete is an interesting proposal...However, the health check seems to be simply repeating a process which most people try to adhere to now.

Most consumers and businesses run anti-virus [software]. But a lot of them don't even know their computers are infected.

So the important question to ask here is: who would be responsible for turning off their internet and how would that be legal? This is a great philosophical idea, but totally impractical when using anti-virus software.

Perhaps if Microsoft had not ended support for Windows 98 and Windows 2000, meaning people using these systems are unable to apply security updates, there wouldn't be such an issue with viruses.

An interesting idea from Scott Charney, but one that I can't see being taken up, unless a cyber-terrorism incident changes things. Let us hope this does not happen.

Comedy Central release more information on the Rally to Restore Sanity and Keep Fear Alive

More information has been released about the Rally to Restore Sanity on October 30th.

Comedy Central have now added a Frequently Asked Questions page, informing people of the times of the rallies (12pm to 3pm EST), that the event is free of charge and that there are seats for disabled people.

For more information, including a list of what you can and cannot bring, travel options and media information, check out the Rally to Restore Sanity FAQ and Keep Fear Alive FAQ.

In related news, Stephen Colbert recently testified before the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship and Border Security.

A Youtube video of his opening statement is below:

Venice, California, cracks down on vehicle dwellers

The community of Venice, California has enacted new regulations limiting street parking and banning motorhomes from beach parking areas, which will have a hugely detrimental effect on people living in their vehicles.

Over 250 vehicles are used as homes in Venice, and a pilot program has been set up to house motorhome dwellers.

City Councilman Bill Rosendahl told the New York Times: "Over the years, it’s only gotten worse, as every other community along the coast has adopted restrictions...For people who want help, we’ll support them."

"The others can take their wheels and go up the coast or somewhere else, God bless them. It’s not our responsibility to be the only spot where near-homelessness is dealt with in the state of California."

Via Cara Kulwicki at The Curvature, who comments:

Time and time again, we see evidence of the fact that most people care more about how “unsightly” homeless people in their neighborhoods are than about the fact that said people don’t have homes. That they may be hungry, don’t have a warm, safe place to sleep, or lack access to health care.

Those of us who are privileged enough to have homes tend to care more about maintaining the illusion that our cities are happy places that take care of their citizens than addressing the fact that an illusion is exactly what it is.

I strongly recommend reading the whole of The Curvature article, which makes some excellent points.

It is often said that social and policy changes in America occur here later down the line, and while we do not yet have the tent cities that dot urban America, it is very likely, especially with the housing benefit cuts, that we will soon have many people living in tents, cars and other dwellings.

Will our communities tolerate them and perhaps even donate basic supplies, or will we try to move them on like in Venice, California?

Labour's war on the motorist is fiction, and the M4 bus lane should be retained

Transport Secretary Philip Hammond will announce that the M4 bus lane will be scrapped, along with empty rhetoric about "Labour's war on the motorist".

Although the picture of Gordon Brown and David Miliband firing grenades at drivers on the M4 from a tank is a slightly humorous one, the idea that the Labour Party were anti-car is rubbish.

The high amounts of money gained from road tax means that there is little incentive for governments to increase spending on public transport or penalise car use.

Indeed, if Labour wanted to cut off the supply of cars they would not have boosted the car industry with the scrappage scheme.

The extensive use of ministerial cars also shows that Labour ministers are as addicted to their cars as the typical Daily Mail reader.

And Daily Mail readers hate the M4 bus lane, as well as anybody who uses public transport.

Mr B J Mann from Nottingham comments:

Almost all commuting is done by private transport.

Almost all goods are hauled by private transport.

Private transport carries a massive tax burden and contributes nearly £50 BILLION pa in extra additional motoring taxes ON TOP of drivers ordinary citizens taxes.

Public transport is heavily subsidised, effectively out of motorists taxes (if you drove all motorists out of their cars and onto buses, do you think ANY government would keep public transport subsidies and cut £50 BILLION pa off the NHS budget?!).

So why should OAPs, benefits claimants, and a few commuters enjoying half price bus fares have priority over the majority of workers paying £50 BILLION pa for the "privilege" of going to work somewhere that isn't easy get to by public transport?

It is ironic that Mr B J Mann lives in the city that the Campaign For Better Transport rated the least car dependant in the UK. I doubt that almost all commuting is done by public transport in Nottingham, nor in most cities across the UK.

Of course, many people in small towns and rural areas are forced into cars due to the poor bus services, and I have every sympathy with these people.

Luckily, they don't have to join Jeremy Clarkson's Resistance Army, because there is no such thing as Labour's war on the motorist.

I take the bus to work, and I can assure Mr B J Mann that at 8:15am the bus is packed with working people. He has clearly never travelled on a bus since he was a boy.

Railways are often used to transport goods, not as much as they should be, but certainly making up a fair proportion. The Gospel Oak to Barking Line, for instance, is often used by freight trains as well.

Why the M4 Bus Lane should be kept:

Public transport, despite the views of Daily Mail readers, is a good thing. It reduces congestion, pollution and allows people who cannot afford a car to get to work.

It also reduces the chances of an accident on the road. I see so many drivers using their mobile phones as they drive along (and for that matter I also see many cyclists tearing along pavements).

However, it is drivers that will lose out if the M4 Bus Lane is scrapped.

As Chris's British Road Directory explains, the bus lane was intended to avoid a bottleneck where three lanes merge into two. Setting up a bus lane further back from the bottleneck ensures that a minimal amount of traffic is in the third lane will join the other two lanes, reducing the chance of a bottleneck.

Chris comments:

A Highways Agency study that concluded recently found that the bus lane was a success - not because it moved buses faster but because it resulted in more reliable journey times on the M4 for all road users, and because it removed one of the worst bottlenecks on the route.

You can see some excellent diagrams of the bus lane's effect at Chris's British Road Directory.

The bus lane will be suspended until the 2012 Olympics, and used during the Games, because our transport policy seems to be geared to supporting a short-term sporting event rather than benefiting the general public. It will then be scrapped

Perhaps in late 2012 we will see a news story demanding action to remove the bottleneck on the M4.

Car drivers of Britain, you can avoid making your journeys into London more difficult by writing to Philip Hammond MP and asking him to retain the M4 bus lane.

Contact him by email:Philip.HammondATdft.gsi.gov.uk (replace AT with @), or write to the Department of Transport,Great Minster House, 76 Marsham Street,London,SW1P 4DR.
Fax: 020 7944 9643.