A great day for liberty and freedom

Down the crapper!New York Times – Senate Panel Approves Gonzales on a Party-Line Vote: The Senate Judiciary Committee, divided along party lines over questions of torture and accountability, voted 10 to 8 on Wednesday in favor of Alberto R. Gonzales’s nomination as the nation’s 80th attorney general.

27 January 2005; mark it in your diaries. It’s the day the western world officially turned to shit.

UPDATE:

ACLU – Government Documents on Torture: More than 600 documents the government did not want the general public to read – including an FBI memo stating that Defense Department interrogators impersonated FBI agents and used “torture techniques” against a detainee at Guantanamo.

DailyKos – Gonzales Requested Torture Memo








Posted in George W. Bush | 2 Comments

Boris spiked!

Boris Johnson’s regular column does not appear in today’s Torygraph. Instead, we get to read about Michael Howard’s views on immigration.

Charming, yes? Surprising, no? Click here to read or leave a comments on Boris’s weblog.

UPDATE – Guardian – Howard’s figures add up to jingoism








Posted in The Political Weblog Movement | Comments Off on Boris spiked!

Jamster Hamster-Dances their way into trouble

I wrote the Crazy Frog post because I initially suspected that Jamster had been a little (ahem) liberal with their approach to copyright. Happily, I was proved wrong. In that case.

But now the ‘hilarious interweb virals’ range from Jamster is being expanded to include a similar approach to some ‘cute’ chicken thing and Hamster Dance… and this time Claymore over at Adland appears to have the goods on them:

I Smell a Rat – An Uncaged and Curious Rodent-Based Doppelganger in AdLand

UPDATE – BBC – ‘The Crazy Frog sound? That’s my fault.’

As you can see, I am often called upon to comment on matters of great import.

;o)








Posted in Teh Interwebs | Comments Off on Jamster Hamster-Dances their way into trouble

I seem to recall saying “And you’re next…”

I don’t care if it’s in Belmarsh, my own home, or a sodding budgie cage… detention without trial is detention without trial. And I’m simply delighted to wake up in a country that will now allow the same treatment of its own citizens. In the interests of fairness, you understand…

BBC – Clarke set for terror plan fight: Charles Clarke’s “control orders” mean UK and foreign citizens suspected of terrorist involvement could be subject to house arrest, curfews or tagging. The Law Society has already dubbed the plans an “abuse of power”.

Guardian – Wider still and wider: First the good news. The home secretary signalled yesterday he does not want a continuing battle with the law lords – or with the opposition parties – over where the line between security and liberty should be drawn. Instead, Charles Clarke accepted the law lords’ ruling in December that current anti-terrorist law, under which suspect foreign nationals are being held in indefinite detention without charge or trial, was unlawful… The bad news is serious. Where the previous act was confined to foreign nationals with links to groups involved with the al-Qaida terrorist network, the new order will be wider in scope (animal rights extremists, suspected Irish terrorists and others will be covered) and applicable to all British subjects. More seriously still, the orders will be imposed by a politician, the home secretary, on security service evidence that will be both untested and unknown to arrested suspects or their lawyers.

Did you catch that last bit? You don’t even need to be linked to the organisation we’re technically/maybe at ‘war’ with.

There are many links here; I suggest you follow them:
Europhobia – It’s for your own good, you know

UPDATE – Boris Johnson: “Just what the hell does Charles Clarke think he is doing, arrogating the power – TO HIMSELF – to detain people indefinitely without trial?”

UPDATE – BBC – Anti-terror measures: Your reaction








Posted in The War on Stupid, Tony 'King Blair | 2 Comments

Where does your ‘news’ come from?

Washington Post – Writer Backing Bush Plan Had Gotten Federal Contract: In 2002, syndicated columnist Maggie Gallagher repeatedly defended President Bush’s push for a $300 million initiative encouraging marriage as a way of strengthening families… But Gallagher failed to mention that she had a $21,500 contract with the Department of Health and Human Services to help promote the president’s proposal… Later in the day, Gallagher filed a column in which she said that “I should have disclosed a government contract when I later wrote about the Bush marriage initiative. I would have, if I had remembered it.”

Curse the liberal media. They tell lies, you know. Ooh, look! Bunnies!

UPDATE – Armstrong Williams.








Posted in George W. Bush | Comments Off on Where does your ‘news’ come from?

Remember

I will never forget.

But neither will I tolerate those who would exploit this tragedy in order to commit or excuse their own crimes against humanity.

I will never forget.

But neither will I tolerate those who would exploit this tragedy in order to commit or excuse their own crimes against humanity.








Posted in Humanity | 1 Comment

The VW Polo ‘suicide bomber’ viral/ad… well done, Dan Brooks and Lee Ford

Being an enemy of George W. Bush makes me a friend to terrorists everywhere, so of course I was greatly amused when I first saw the ‘suicide bomber’ ad that may or may not have been made for VW that first appeared around the 15th of this month. In fact, I laughed so hard I forgot to blog it. But I’ll leave the funny/not debate to others. I’m going elsewhere on this and I want to start with a rough timeline of headlines:

18 Jan: VW’s ad is spoof on terror
19 Jan: Volkswagen distances itself from suicide bomber viral ad
20 Jan: Volkswagen denies offensive viral marketing
20 Jan: Volkswagen planning to take legal action
24 Jan: VW threatens suit over bogus suicide bomber ad

24 Jan: Media Daily News – Volkswagen Fights Viral Infection: Lee and Dan, a London-based Independent agency, has taken credit for the spot, which treads the line between edgy and offensive, but the U.K. agency has not yet publicly stated who – if anyone – funded the spot – which has high production values and appears to be professionally made. VW vehemently denies having anything to do with the effort. “Volkswagen dissociates itself absolutely from a hoax advertisement that has recently been accessible via the Internet,” a VW spokesperson said. “Neither Volkswagen nor any agency acting on behalf of Volkswagen was involved in any way with the creation, production, or distribution of this material.”

26 Jan: VW to sue Polo bomb ad duo: Both Lee and Dan have apologised for the film, which they said had a 40,000 (pound) budget, but have refused to identify themselves or explain how it was funded. But in a new development, MediaGuardian.co.uk has tracked down the director of the spoof advert, Stuart Fryer, 35. Breaking his silence for the first time, he said he was horrified by the reaction to the ad and had only ever meant it to be used on a showreel and never seen by the public. He disputed Lee and Dan’s estimate of its 40,000 (pound) cost, saying the cost had been “more like 400 (pounds)”. “If it cost that much I would like to know where the money went,” Mr Fryer said. “It was made in my spare time. It’s remarkable what you can do for such a low budget.”

As Snopes points out: Companies often try to obscure the connections between themselves and their viral ads, sometimes claiming that promotions were “unauthorized” or “accidentally released.” Though this technique may be effective in generating publicity, it can also backfire: If someone does indeed produce an unauthorized viral ad that creates negative publicity for the business it supposedly promotes, how can a company prove they weren’t behind it? This is the dilemma currently faced by Volkswagen regarding a viral ad seemingly calculated to offend as many human beings as possible.

The 40K figure initially read to me as part of a PR plug for Lee and Dan’s services; as in: ‘yes, we made the ad – and this is what it costs to make one of your own’… but that funding question had been bouncing around since the 40K figure was revealed by them. That the director broke his silence to do something so important as to refute this figure and present a ridiculously low one in its place strikes me as suspicious.

Some folks at World Net Daily and Ad Rag have similar doubts about the actual distance between this ad and VW or its agency DDB. In fact, in the latter link, you’ll find an interesting comment by Caffeine Goddess: “I’ve been thinking, it’s not really that far fetched that VW did think of making this as a viral ad. In October 2003, they had that Bollocks ad that was created for TV but because of the language, they ran it as a viral instead. Also by BMP DDB, London.

The Goddess continues with this wry observation today: “Looks like VW is still promising to sue the VW polo suicide ad creators. Strange that VW can’t find them. Especially if they created the ad to show to their ad agency- someone, somewhere must have a business card they left behind.”

Hehehe. Well said.

Oh, and the last names of Lee and Dan that seem so elusive? It took me about 2 minutes to track down the name Dan Brooks.

UPDATE – Lee and Dan were also behind superstuntslug.com, which appears to have been withdrawn for some unknown reason (leaving only unprotected directories behind). Here’s Google’s cache. There’s nowt to see; I just find it curious that this site was removed this week.

UPDATE – You can see one of the slug clips on Lee and Dan’s site. If you feel you must.

UPDATE – And what is it with the semi-private-showreel-only-meant-to-be-seen-by-a-select-few line of bull? These people deal in viral videos for a living. What did they expect would happen after they published it on their own website?

UPDATE – Via Site-9 WeblogVolkswagen Disavows Suicide Bomb Ad; Viral Marketing Firm Connected

UPDATE (1st Feb) – CNN – Makers of VW bomber film come clean: Volkswagen said in a statement it had received sworn statements from the two creators – Dan Brooks and Lee Ford – acknowledging that they made the ad but had not intended for it to be distributed.

1. Makers of viral videos publish a video on their website and don’t expect it to be distributed? Puh-lease!
2. With all the time, money and sensitive negotiations that went into the new Gene Kelly ad (you can see it here) I’m not suprised tha VW were so willing to throw Dan and Lee to the wolves. Or perhaps the hamsters. After all, all VW did was *threaten* to sue unless the boys ‘withdrew’ the ad (good luck collecting all those versions saved to hard drives around the planet; soon to appear at a mirror location near you) and made a statement that VW and DDB had nothing to do with it.
3. I’m not buying it.








Posted in Video | 4 Comments

It always tastes better when you make it yourself

Some Calvin and Hobbes moments rendered lovingly in snow. Just lovely.

Also of interest is the story of a person who took a picture of a girl taking a picture and the Error Message Generator.

Oh, and here’s a fan of Lindsay Lohan.

UPDATE – Oops. Almost forgot the drive to find egg and sperm donors. Can you believe there are only 250 men a year who donate sperm? Normally, I’d be inclined to chip in and help on the publicity front, but I’m not sure a ‘Wank For Britain’ campaign (complete with theme tune) would be welcome.

UPDATE – Congratulations to Tom, who appears to be one of the few MPs to have used the word ‘ejaculation’ in the House of Commons.

UPDATE – Some (condensed) food for thought and bloggers saying ‘no’ on Gonzales.








Posted in Riding High on Blogdex | 4 Comments

Justice for some (possibly) and liberty for others (maybe)

BBC – Guantanamo four face questioning: UK anti-terror police are expected to begin questioning four Britons released from US custody at Guantanamo Bay… But Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stevens said evidence obtained by MI5 while the four were in Cuba was “absolutely” inadmissible in UK courts. In an interview with the Independent, Sir John said his officers would have to find other evidence before the suspects could be tried in the UK. He told the newspaper: “If an admission is made, it is a totally different ball game… it could be used as evidence.

Actually, given the likely mental state of someone who has just been released from 3 years of detention and torture, I’d be inclined to question the admissibility of a full confession extracted immediately upon ‘release’… but that’s the hole we’ve dug for ourselves.

Speaking of holes we have dug…

Guardian – Clarke backs down on detainees: (As Guantanamo four arrive back, the home secretary prepares to act on suspects held in UK.) The home secretary, Charles Clarke, is expected to announce today that he will accept the law lords’ ruling that the indefinite detention without trial of 12 terror suspects in Britain breaches human rights laws.

So, we have ‘our boys’ home and we’re (maybe) dealing with a similar issue on our own soil. I suppose it would be too much to expect to have a government strong enough to make a stand for everybody being held for years on end without charge or trial in Guantanamo Bay… and being tortured there or elsewhere.

HRW – U.S.: Justifying Abuse of Detainees: The Bush administration contends that no law prevents the Central Intelligence Agency from engaging in inhumane treatment of detainees abroad, Human Rights Watch said today. In responses to U.S. Senate inquiries, White House Counsel and Attorney General-nominee Alberto Gonzales claimed that the prohibition on cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment – enshrined in a treaty the United States ratified in 1994 – does not apply to U.S. personnel in the treatment of non-citizens abroad. While asserting that torture by all U.S. personnel was unlawful, Gonzales indicated that no law would prohibit the CIA from engaging in cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment when it interrogates non-Americans outside the United States. The interpretation would permit the CIA to commit in secret detention facilities abroad many of the shocking forms of abuse that took place at Abu Ghraib.

Even if every one of these men is guilty, their detention without charge or trial violates the rule of law.

Even if every one of these men is guilty, their torture at our hands or the hands of others is morally indefensible.

Even if every one of these men is guilty, treating them in such a manner does not combat terrorism… instead, it fosters it.

I’m no fan of fucktards who convince others that the path of liberty and justice involves blowing up civilians (and that goes for al Qaeda, the US government and our own government) but you have to acknowledge that this kind of behaviour just makes it easier for al Qaeda to find willing recruits.

And even without this minor practicality the following question has to be asked:

If we’re forced to surrender our own morals and humanity in the War on Terror – then what the bloody hell are we fighting to save?

UPDATE – Via Bob PiperWhy isn’t Mark Thatcher in Belmarsh?

UPDATE – BBC – Guantanamo men released: Your views

UPDATE – BBC – What impact does being locked up all day, away from any other human beings, have on an individual’s mind?








Posted in The War on Stupid | 1 Comment

Disclaimer: I took one of your jobs and married one of your women…

Today Page 3 stunna Jak (19, from Tunbridge Wells) thinks there’s nothing racist about protecting Britain’s borders. She says: “We’re a small island nation and we’re already overcrowded. Michael Howard’s view on immigration is shared throughout the country. It simply makes sense.”

See? It’s. Just. Common. Sense.

The girl with the boobs has spoken.

An important thing to remember about Murdoch and Blair is that – as cosy as their relationship might seem – Murdoch will not hesitate to give Blair a solid kicking over issues like the EU and immigration… which is why you can expect Blair or Clarke to make a ‘common-sense stand on immigration’ someday soon.

So… when/where did this latest round of immigration ‘debate’ originate?

I’ve said it elsewhere (1, 2) and I’ll say it here; it’s almost as if some bright spark working for the Tories was watching ITV’s Vote For Me and taking notes.

The winner, in case you missed this landmark show that was broadcast for the post-pub audience and over in little more than a week, was one Rodney Hylton-Potts.

Guardian/Observer – Row erupts as TV’s new political idol accused of being racist: A innovative attempt to revitalise the public’s interest in politics, by subjecting would-be MPs to a Pop Idol-style reality TV show, descended into ugly scenes last night after the winner was accused of holding views to the right of the British National Party. Rodney Hylton-Potts, who has served two years in Brixton prison for fraud, should have been spending this weekend celebrating his Friday night victory in ITV’s Vote For Me competition. But instead he is being forced to deny allegations that he told a fellow competitor that in the 1960s ‘you could drive to Henley without seeing a nigger on the streets’. Hylton-Potts, who won the competition on the strength of what he calls his ‘cabbie’s manifesto’ – the mandatory castration of paedophiles, the legalisation of all drugs, the repeal of the human rights act, a massive prison-building scheme and an immigrant deportation programme that would reduce Britain’s population by 20 million – vehemently denies the allegation.

So, thanks ITV, for liberating political democracy from its current cultural ghetto.

Also, thanks for placing me in one of those rare situations when I am forced to agree with Alastair Campbell…

Guardian – ‘Political idol’ loses Campbell’s vote: Campbell claimed the show was exploitative and said it would further undermine the public’s faith in the political system. “It’s crass. They say it is about engaging young people in politics but it will have the effect of further undermining politics,” said Campbell.








Posted in Page 3 - News in Briefs, Rupert 'The Evil One' Murdoch, UK General Election 2005 | 2 Comments