It seems that the mainstream media in the USA is so afraid of their scripted narrative being thrown off course by extraneous data that the Washington Post has called for the media not to publish data from Wikileaks.
For why?
Wikileaks can only be the work of the "evil" Russians, because it contravenes the version of "reality" promulgated by the MSM!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Well I have to say that this coalition government is certainly beginning to show its true colours.
Despite the paralysis of Heathrow, one of the world's largest airports (a vital economic hub for the UK), the government showed a "can't do/won't do" spirit and a remarkable lack of leadership wrt actually trying to resolve the problem. All it did was to send the hapless, hopeless and somnambulistic Transport Secretary to meet with the witless board of BAA.
Meanwhile another member of the government (a foolish elderly man easily flattered by the attention of two young female reporters posing as constituents) declared war on Rupert Murdoch. Should government ministers be taking their personal prejudices and vendettas into their day jobs?
The final layer of icing on this cake of folly was added by Nanny's Culture Secretary, Ed Vaizey, who has come up with an internet censorship plan to rival the great firewall of China. He want to ban porn on the net, and block it "at source".
The excuse that he uses, as indeed all Nannys use, is that the ban would "protect the children".
Funny that I thought we lived in a world designed and run for/by adults, not vice versa.
As in the days of the Lord Chancellor (who would censor scripts for "smutty" references to "bananas" etc), the problem comes with the definition of what exactly is "pornographic" (ankles, boobs, feet??? All of these are capable of arousing some people but not others).
The reality would be that, even if it were feasible to block porn (experts contend a firewall such as China's would have to be constructed) other non porn sites would also be blocked (and most certainly would be tempting Nanny to block them).
However, I dare say that in the fullness of time a site would arise (WankiLeaks) that would enable people to jump over the wall to look at all the porn they needed.
Do not be too relaxed about this, as noted above the coalition has been showing its true colours recently; governments that lack leadership, declare private wars on sections of the media they don't like and who try to censor the net are not to be trusted.
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Those of you who have managed to stay awake during the ongoing WikiLeaks drip drip release of diplomatic chit chat may find the following article, published on China Matters, to be of interest.
It seems, if Peter Lee (the author) is correct, that this is a media run leak (rather than a WikiLeak run leak) whereby the US has allowed the media organisations to redact certain data.
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
As we know, Nanny and her acolytes have something of a fetish for gathering data on all of us and putting that data into databases.
Nanny's rationale being that the databases help her to "help" us live "better" more "secure" lives etc etc; eg the "super" NHS database (that has yet to work) and the proposed child "protection" database (that allows all manner of people access to personal details).
Nanny has assured us, on numerous occasions, that the data stored in these databases is secure.
Bollocks!
As we have seen in the UK (eg with the loss of HMRC data on 25 million people), databases are far from secure.
However, the ongoing Wikileaks fiasco wrt 250,000 "classified" US cables knocks the UK security failures into a cocked hat.
Whilst the content of the leaked cables is, to people with half a brain, hardly surprising and in many cases bordering on the trivial; the damage done to US diplomatic efforts is incalculable. People will now treat US diplomats in the same way as they treat journalists, and work on the assumption that whatever is said may well appear on the net one day.
How did this fiasco come to pass?
Post 9/11 the US became more scared and paranoid than it usually is. Now, under such conditions, one would assume that there would have been a "security lockdown" wrt handling diplomatic communications.
Perversely, no, the exact opposite happened.
Working from the premise that sharing data would increase US security, the government of the day undertook to build a central database of all diplomatic communications.
Maybe, in itself, this was a logical idea.
However, the US government then asked themselves the fundamental question wrt databases namely:
"Who do we grant access rights to?"
They chose, for reasons that are beyond any understanding, to grant unfettered access rights to over 3.5 million people.
Yes, you did read that correctly, over 3.5 million people were given access rights to this database!
An accident waiting to happen!
Quite why the US authorities are so "shocked" over this leak is beyond me. Frankly the fact that the leak didn't occur years ago is more surprising.
The lesson to our own Nanny is clear, databases can be abused. To leave the design and security of such databases to politicians (who have zero experience of the real world, work or IT) is asking for trouble.
BTW, one small question, what on earth does the US government want the biometric data of UN personnel for?
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
