Think this is some of what roddy means. Spook tools, from the dirty tricks dept.... This lot points at you, whether you're considered a dissenter, or terrorist, what the difference, they say ............................. !!

Hard to determine though, of it's some teen with a baseball hat, or, a real spook.....

Scary though eh?

data interception by remote transmission :> http://www.codexdatasystems.com/menu.html

Critical Infrastructure Protection in the Information Age - US Executive Order :> http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/10/20011016-12.html

NET Observe Spy Software :> http://www.spy-software-solutions.com/net-observe.htm

iDefence :> http://www.idefense.com/flashintro.html

EU's secret network to spy on anti-capitalist protesters

The Independent
By Stephen Castle in Brussels
20 August 2001


Leading article: Police co-operation must not trample on protesters' rights European leaders have ordered police and intelligence agencies to co-ordinate their efforts to identify and track the anti-capitalist demonstrators whose violent protests at recent international summits culminated in the shooting dead by police of a young protester at the Genoa G8 meeting last month.
The new measures clear the way for protesters travelling between European Union countries to be subjected to an unprecedented degree of surveillance.
Confidential details of decisions taken by Europe's interior ministers at talks last month show that the authorities will use a web of police and judicial links to keep tabs on the activities and whereabouts of protesters. Europol, the EU police intelligence-sharing agency based in The Hague that was set up to trap organised criminals and drug traffickers, is likely to be given a key role.
The plan has alarmed civil rights campaigners, who argue that personal information on people who have done no more than take part in a legal demonstration may be entered into a database and exchanged.
Calls for a new Europe-wide police force to tackle the threat from hardline anti-capitalists were led after the Genoa summit by Germany's Interior Minister, Otto Schily. Germany has long pushed for the creation of a Europe-wide crime-fighting agency modelled on the FBI.
Germany's EU partners rejected Mr Schily's call, judging that a new force to combat political protest movements was too controversial, but ministers agreed to extend the measures that can be taken under existing powers. Central to the new push is the secretive Article 36 committee (formerly known as the K4 committee) and the Schengen Information System, both of which allow for extensive contact and data sharing between police forces.
Under the new arrangements, European governments and police chiefs will:
· Set up permanent contact points in every EU country to collect, analyse and exchange information on protesters;
· Create a pool of liaison officers before each summit staffed by police from countries from which "risk groups" originate;
· Use "police or intelligence officers" to identify "persons or groups likely to pose a threat to public order and security";
· Set up a task force of police chiefs to organise "targeted training" on violent protests.

The new measures will rely on two main ways of exchanging police information. The Schengen Information System, which provides basic information, and a supporting network called Sirene - Supplementary Information Request at the National Entry. This network (of which Britain is a member) allows pictures, fingerprints and other information to be sent to police or immigration officials once a suspect enters their territory. Each country already has a Sirene office with established links to EU and Nordic law enforcement agencies.
Civil liberties campaigners are dismayed by the plan. Tony Bunyan, editor of Statewatch magazine, said: "This will give the green light to Special Branch and MI5 to put under surveillance people whose activities are entirely democratic."
Nicholas Busch, co-ordinator of the Fortress Europe network on civil liberties issues, added: "People who have done nothing against the law ought to be able to feel sure they are not under surveillance ... By criminalising whole political and social scenes you fuel confrontation and conflict."
Thomas Mathieson, professor of sociology of law at the University of Oslo, said police could have access to "very private information" about people's religion, sex lives and politics. "It is a very dangerous situation from the civil liberties point of view," he said.





I dunno, just interested to know that this sort of thing goes on .......

Data Interception by Remote Transmission

D.I.R.T.TM - Data Interception by Remote Transmission is a powerful remote control monitoring tool that allows stealth monitoring of all activity on one or more target computers simultaneously from a remote command center.
No physical access is necessary. Application also allows agents to remotely seize and secure digital evidence prior to physically entering suspect premises.

Codex Data Systems, Inc. will provide our D.I.R.T. software for FREE to all US law enforcement agencies, US Intelligence agencies and US Military agencies to aid in the apprehension or identification of the persons responsible for the events
of September 11, 2001 in New York and Washington, D.C.

Your agency's use of our D.I.R.T. software will remain classified by us
and will not be advertised, disclosed publicly or disclosed to any third party.

Please contact our CEO directly to arrange the expeditious transfer
of our technology to your agency.

Assisting the law enforcement community since June 6th, 1998
Requirements: Agency letterhead is required before information will be forwarded on this product. Sale is restricted to bona fide law enforcement, governmental and military agencies. Codex Data Systems, Inc. is the creator and sole source of this product.

http://www.codexdatasystems.com/menu.html

---

This is a prime example of piece of RABID press work.

This one is particularly obnoxious. There was a rash of really evil coverage a while ago, this is the first for quite a while, of this severity. Hate to give it space on my site, but, it does give an idea of how a reason argument with some folks, is quite imposible.

I hope to be taking advice, to see if we can't proceed against these people........

If anyone was there, and fancies it, here is the details of the Press Complaints Commission http://www.pcc.org.uk/cop/cop.asp

BEWARE THE RETURN OF THE SUMMER INVADERS

09:00 - 02 July 2002

Problems caused by illegal ravers at an airfield in East Devon have brought back chilling memories for MARK DANIEL,

For many, the scenes at Smeatharpe near Honiton, where 1,000 travellers, thought to have been frustrated by the successful security at Glastonbury Festival, have encamped for their own substitute rave, have caused a shudder of recognition and well-warranted fear. Every year for many years, Westcountry farmers - and motorists - braced themselves for an annual invasion at or around the summer solstice as those purportedly seeking to celebrate peace and nature demonstrated that they were the habitual enemies of both.FOR many, the scenes at Smeatharpe near Honiton, where 1,000 travellers, thought to have been frustrated by the successful security at Glastonbury Festival, have encamped for their own substitute rave, have caused a shudder of recognition and well-warranted fear. Every year for many years, Westcountry farmers - and motorists - braced themselves for an annual invasion at or around the summer solstice as those purportedly seeking to celebrate peace and nature demonstrated that they were the habitual enemies of both.

In what Ian Johnson of the National Farmers' Union yesterday described as "a grotesque sort of relay", convoys of rickety vans and caravans, often several miles long, were passed from police authority to police authority as they travelled westward. Farmers in each region quaked. Once allow these itinerants to park on your land, and only a laboriously-won injunction could move them on. In the four days or more which it could take to obtain such an order, fences could be ripped down for fuel, crops trampled, livestock disturbed and often endangered, and human inhabitants intimidated by the giant dogs favoured by the travellers.

When at last the invading convoy moved on, it left behind, in lieu of visitors' cards, a characteristic trail of litter and ordure.

Farmers, of course, are not a listless or namby-pamby bunch, and they took action to deter these unwanted tourists. In general, this was defensive action - granite boulders and heavy equipment on verges, narrowed gateways and the like are still to be found throughout the region. At times, however, action became more direct and offensive. I know of farmers who, among other tactics, "accidentally" showered encampments with slurry and bombarded them with sporadic and offensive sound, day and night. The police found themselves attempting to keep the peace in what was increasingly looking like an annual, ever-escalating war.

As with most wars, the right was not all on one side. Many would damn travellers simply for being travellers. Having lived in rural Ireland and fought to defend my property and livestock from the worst of itinerants, I consider myself a connoisseur of this culture. There were, then, at least four distinct classes of traveller. The true gypsies, versed in Romany lore and extraordinarily skilled with horses, were the most welcome and the rarest. I was invited to the funeral of one such, at which all his property, including many thousands of banknotes, were ritually burned in his caravan.

Then there were the "suburban" travellers, whom I classify as such because of their tastes rather than their travelling habits. Their caravans, which travelled alone or in twos or threes, were invariably crammed with ornate crystal or china. Laundry always hung between their caravans and the hedgerows, and their children attended school regularly, and generally looked a deal cleaner and smarter than mine. Some were born to the travelling life. Others were ideological travellers, who merely preferred life on the road. Others again - surely a rapidly growing class in this country - had acquired the apparently almost unbreakable travelling habit because of the disparity between incomes and house prices.

And then there were the "knackers". These were highly organised villains. They lived in filth, they fought among themselves, they fought with the Gardai, with their children's occasional teachers and with every representative of authority, but they had friends and relatives who wore very, very tidy fatigues.

There was a well-known rule for Irish landowners - never give a glass of water to a stranger. Greet him or her rather with a glower, a curse and a fierce dog, barely restrained. The knackers usually sent one of their women, usually equipped with an infant, to your door to beg for a drink for the child. Once identify yourself as a soft touch, and you were done for. One caravan would be parked on your land within hours, 20 within days. Within weeks, following an injunction, they would leave. Within a month, your house would be rid of all valuables. Within another 24 hours, those valuables would be with experts in Holland or Switzerland.

And finally, there was the "New Age" crowd - "ideological" travellers in so far as ideology was convenient. Those I encountered were lazy, physically no less than intellectually. They were promiscuous and riddled with HIV. Meningitis trailed in their wake. They were inexpressibly dirty. They used drugs, had large dogs, espoused nature worship but hobnobbed with "knackers". They were urban spume drifting into rural waters. This is a rude analysis, but I beg the indulgence of the travelling community. I am, after all, pleading that they be treated as members of distinct classes, rather than as a homogenous whole. Imprecision is surely preferable to the gross prejudice which brands the worldwide community.

In 1994 British law was changed to bring the hostilities, if not to an end, at least to a tense ceasefire. The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act empowered the police to demand that travellers leave a site "so soon as practicable". No arrests, have yet been made under this provision, presumably for fear of European Human Rights legislation. The Act also enabled the police, however, to search vehicles, and the condition of most of these meant that the invading army could no longer campaign in force.

"We can only hope this latest gathering does not mark a renewal of the annual cultural rebellion," said Ian Johnson. "The travelling community is diverse, and many of its members are law-abiding and respectful of property. As ever, it is the bad apples which taint the whole barrowload. I believe these are partygoers deprived of a party, which makes them a friendly and cheerful crowd but for a few idiots. I pray I am right, because the bad old days were very, very bad, and we do not want to see them recreated."

http://www.thisisdevon.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=77707&command=displayContent&sourceNode=77259&contentPK=2039166

THIS IS WHAT IVE TRIED TO DO ABOUT IT>>>>>>
=============================================================
Monday, 08 July 2002

Hello again.

Gosh! Having sent you a mail, over the weekend. It was some collected info on the new government proposals regarding further traveller law. But, being lawyers, your probably ahead of me. I'm just making sure. J

Anyway, you'll know that law charges, or proposals, sometimes gives folks the 'green light' to behave badly towards minorities….. This is usually the vigilante tendency on the ground! However, the press also think they can get all Nazi in their attitudes also.

Shortly after send info about new government proposals, I had just been sent the link to this information. In paper called "This is Devon" - all copied below.

I am particularly angry / concerned / bothered about the whole article, but, specifically content of para #9

Is there anything to be done? Really doesn't seem fair.

Very best

Alan Lodge [tash]

=============================================================

Tuesday, 09 July 2002

Hi Rachel.

You will have had a mail from me over the weekend, about the new anti-trav measures announced yesterday, bastards!. They've still not finished yet then. The mail contained the press items on it and the gov response announcement from dept prime minister etc…..

Anyway, you'll know that law charges, or proposals, sometimes gives folks the 'green light' to behave badly towards minorities….. This is usually the vigilante tendency on the ground! However, the press also think they can get all Nazi in their attitudes also.

Shortly after sending info about new government proposals, I had been sent the link to this information. [all included and link, below] In paper called "This is Devon"

I am particularly angry / concerned / bothered about the whole article, but, specifically content of para #9

Spoke to the Traveller Law Partnership in Birmingham, yesterday. They thought it unreasonable, but suggested I contacted you. They only able to advise on eviction etc….

Really doesn't seem fair just to leave it. Not sure if there is crime there. Don't know the criteria or, likely success for press complaints.

What do you reckon, Is there anything to be done?

Very best

Alan Lodge [tash]

===================================================================
Rachel Morris [MorrisRC1@Cardiff.ac.uk]

Re: They were promiscuous and riddled with HIV. Meningitis trailed in their wake.

The Traveller Law Research Unit (TLRU) exists to conduct and publish research into the law and policy relating to Travelling People (including on its web site - address below) and to produce the magazine Travellers' Times. With this remit, and one full-time member of academic staff with no secretarial support, it cannot provide advice, information or non-TLRU publications on request. It has not been funded to do so since April 1998.
For general advice and information contact Friends, Families and Travellers on 01273 234777 (there is a link to their web pages on the TLRU web site under 'links'). For legal advice and representation contact the Telephone Advice Line for Travellers on 0845 120 2980: the service commences Tuesday April 2 and the Line will be staffed from 10am to 1pm and 2-5pm Monday to Friday (except bank holidays).
Best wishes
TLRU

==================================================================

Tuesday, 09 July 2002

Attention: Chris Johnson,

Hello,

Did what you suggested and tried rachel morris in cardiff with the 'this is devon' piece.

I think I just got an automated reply::

The Traveller Law Research Unit (TLRU) exists to conduct and publish research into the law and policy relating to Travelling People (including on its web site - address below) and to produce the magazine Travellers' Times. With this remit, and one full-time member of academic staff with no secretarial support, it cannot provide advice, information or non-TLRU publications on request. It has not been funded to do so since April 1998.
For general advice and information contact Friends, Families and Travellers on 01273 234777 (there is a link to their web pages on the TLRU web site under 'links'). For legal advice and representation contact the Telephone Advice Line for Travellers on 0845 120 2980: the service commences Tuesday April 2 and the Line will be staffed from 10am to 1pm and 2-5pm Monday to Friday (except bank holidays).
Best wishes
TLRU

An attempt to refer back to you. J

So that 's that then.

Cheers

Alan lodge

===================================================================
Thanks for your note about TLRU. Fair enough! If you know someone in Devon who wants to take this up, please ask them to phone us on the advice line.
Yours,
Chris Johnson
office@communitylawpartnership.co.uk

The Community Law Partnership
4th Floor, Ruskin Chambers
191 Corporation Street
Birmingham B4 6RP
Tel: 0121 685 8595
Fax: 0121 236 5121

---

Really doesn't seem fair just to leave it. Not sure if there is crime there. Don't know the criteria for press complaints.

What i do know though, is if this sort of think is allowed to stand, the vigilante quotient' increases, and will lead to futher physical stress.!!

Press Complaints Commission
http://www.pcc.org.uk/cop/cop.asp

---

and a letter about it, Roger tells me, they wouldn't publish it is 'this is devon', however, this got in this is exeter .....no balance really,

Give Us Somewhere We Can Hold Our Free Parties


12:00 - 12 July 2002

The reporting of the free festival at Smeatharpe is a classic example of lazy journalism trotting out all the boring old stereotypes and missing the real story.

The Echo presented the event in terms of "filth" and disruption to local residents yet a cursory examination of the situation would show that the site was well chosen.

It is well out of the way and with plenty of space.

It was the decision of the police to blockade the event that lead to cars being left in country lanes for miles around and causing people to tramp across locals' property to get to the festival.

Had it not been for the police roadblocks, most locals would have been unaware that anything was even happening up there.

The real story here is that due to the increasing commercialisation of events like the Glastonbury Festival, those dispossessed by high ticket prices and the activities of promoters and vendors, have created their own alternative festival.

We do not need to have our culture sold back to us by some greedy entrepreneur; all we ask is for a bit of land to have our celebration.

There is no shortage of suitable places, eg MoD land, that could be made available. Then we could ensure that facilities like toilets and firewood were on hand instead of making do, as happened last week.

The Echo points to new laws that have been passed to prevent gatherings like Smeatharpe but what you don't seem to realise is that it is the implementation of those very laws that force us to hold events in this way because we have been given no legal alternatives.

Those who attended the rave were just as outraged as everyone else by the incident where the van crashed through the gate. It seems the driver concerned also narrowly avoided running over more people when he got to the site, before the van was torched.

The Echo picture of the aftermath shows burnt out cars, old tyres and bags of rubbish piled high. And yet the burnt out cars, apart from the van mentioned above, were already on the airfield when we arrived, as were the tyres which are used to build a track by the local banger racing club.

I helped in the clean-up after the party and the rubbish was bagged up nicely for the council to collect (unlike the rubbish left after the Queen's jubilee event). Furthermore, I did not find one single needle yet your article implies that there were "needles strewn all over the fields"; another smear based on stereotypes that only serve to heighten the locals' fear of the revellers.

How much damage was really caused on the site?

Sure, a barbed wire fence was taken up to gain access but this was neatly rolled up so that it could be replaced and although a small part of the cornfield had been trampled, I cannot see how this could run into "thousands of pounds of damage".

We do not like to upset locals with our gatherings and these problems will be eliminated when it is realised that we need somewhere to party. Give us a suitable place then we can all be happy.

Mr R Lewis


http://www.thisisexeter.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=103277&command=displayContent&sourceNode=103272&contentPK=2107058

---

Hi all,

The story so far, for travellers in this country has been oppressive. No change there then!

Bloody Heck! Here is the next instalment,

Some of this has been 'expressed' up the agenda, by the events at Smethorpe Airfield, Devon, Glastonbury fringes, and would you believe, trad travellers camping out on the lawns at Eton College.

Michael Howard (bless him), the Author of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, produced the Tories effort at our control.

&

Jack Straw (also bless him), a couple of years ago had provoked a storm of controversy after suggesting groups of travellers were trading on a sentimental "gypsy" image while committing serious crimes.

Right and left have been equally horrid to us. Travellers and similar really do have no political friends and just have to take what's thrown.

It appears that this lot is pointing at traditional travellers,

HOWEVER,

apart from those that live in 'tourist type' bow-tops and selling lavender, will all be treated the same. Our 'internal' distinctions that we make, on what 'tribe' we are in, makes no diff to these chaps.

---

Police given new powers to evict Gypsies from sites
Patrick Wintour, chief political correspondent
Guardian
Saturday July 6, 2002

The government yesterday responded to a storm of often media-led pressure by announcing that the police are to be given new powers to evict Gypsies and travellers if they refuse to move on to local authority designated sites.
Ministers also said they would not require every local council to set up official sites for travellers.
At present the police can only evict if there is evidence of abusive behaviour, criminal damage or the presence of six or more vehicles on the site. The powers do not apply if the encampment is on land forming part of the highway.
In a compromise the government has decided the eviction powers will only apply where local authorites have made provision for temporary, transit and emergency stopping sites for travellers who regularly pass through their area.
Ministers hope their proposals will ease the cultural clashes between travellers and the community but Andrew Ryder, the secretary of the Labour campaign for travellers rights, said the measures did not go far enough to help travellers.
"It is essential there is a good system of sites available, or else eviction leads to travellers being pushed on from one site to another. Many of the problems are caused by social exclusion from services, and the refusal of councils to give planning permission for Gypsies to live on their own land," he said.
The government announced that some money in an existing £17m Gypsy site fund is likely to be rechanneled so councils open up new sites.
Mr Ryder also pointed out that Labour had condemned the decision of the Conservative government eight years ago to remove the obligation on councils to provide sites as reckless and spiteful.
In January, the official government count found that 2,774 caravans - or 20% of all British Gypsy caravans - were on unauthorised encampments. The survey showed 326 more families were on unauthorised sites than in January 2001, without guaranteed access to water, toilets and schooling.
The package, jointly announced by the Home Office and the office of the deputy prime minister yesterday, is designed to meet the continuing complaints that travellers ruin the local landscape, leave litter and behave anti-socially.
The plan - vague in parts - appears to have been rushed out ahead of a private members bill to be debated next week and sponsored by the Conservative MP for Bournemouth East, David Atkinson. The Tory-led bill is likely to be more generous to travellers than government policy, but would also underline ministerial failure to come up with its own response.
The government acknowledged that disputes between councils and police over responsibility often leave communities angry at the failure of anyone to intervene. Many Tory MPs have claimed the police probably have adequate powers to remove trespassers, but do not use them.
Even Labour MPs, such as Bill Rammell, MP for Harlow, have called for travellers, rather than council tax payers to be made liable for damage caused during an illegal occupation. Guidance on managing unauthorised camping, including the proper disposal of waste, will be published in the autumn.
The guidance will emphasise the "same standards of behaviour and regard for the law are expected from all sectors of the community, including regard for public health and waste".
Gypsies claim the problem of the lack of sites is compounded by their inadequate quality. Many of 325 local authority Gypsy sites in England are often near rubbish dumps, sewage works or noisy industrial facilities. It has been claimed they epitomise the definition of a ghetto.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4456003,00.html

BBC - Travellers face eviction powers

Friday, 5 July, 2002, 14:53 GMT 15:53 UK

Police could be given new powers against unauthorised traveller camps in what ministers are calling a "radical overhaul" of existing measures. Travellers can currently only be evicted if there has been criminal damage or anti-social behaviour on campsites.

The new powers could be used without that condition but only in areas where local councils have provided temporary sites for regular travellers.

Ministers are planning to help councils fund new temporary camps, as well as continuing to help refurbishing existing local authority sites.

Unauthorised camps have frequently caused rows between travellers and angry local residents in many parts of the UK.

Help for local councils

Authorised council sites have also prompted planning rows.

Full details of the plans, published by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and the Home Office, will be announced in the autumn.

The government is stressing that "tough" new police eviction powers must be linked to the availability of legal sites.

The government plans to provide initial funding to help local councils for "temporary, transit and emergency" stops by travellers.

That money is set to be put forward in 2003 along with a new look to the next round of the gypsy site refurbishment programme.

The government has, however, yet to say how much money it will provide.

New national guidance is being put out on dealing with unauthorised camping.

No 'blind eye'

Ministers say those guidelines will be shaped by the views of residents, business people and farmers, as well as travellers.

A government spokesman said: "The new guidance will in particular emphasise the need for effective local strategies."

Those strategies needed to make clear where police and local councils took the lead.

Housing Minister Tony McNulty said the plans would help councils deal with the problem of unauthorised camps.

"Our strategy is balanced and fair," said Mr McNulty. "

"The same standard of behaviour of travellers should be the same as that expected of the settled community and does not mean turning a blind eye to anti-social behaviour."

Room for caravans

In January this year there were 325 local council traveller camp sites with room for more than 5,000 caravans.

The government says that national network can accommodate "just under half of gypsy caravans".

But local councils are also told to consider providing places with basic waste, water and toilet facilities where travellers who visit their areas regularly can stop.

Police recently moved on travellers from land owned by exclusive Berkshire school Eton College because they believed there had been criminal damage.

Three years ago, then Home Secretary Jack Straw was accused of racism by travellers' leaders.

Mr Straw has provoked a storm of controversy after suggesting groups of travellers were trading on a sentimental "gypsy" image while committing serious crimes.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_2097000/2097667.stm

HOME OFFICE

A NEW APPROACH TO TACKLING UNAUTHORISED TRAVELLER CAMPS

Reference: STATEMENT - Date: 5 Jul 2002 10:59
A radical overhaul of policy on unauthorised traveller encampments has been announced today to tackle public concern about nuisance and disorder arising from such encampments.
The Government’s new strategy combines tough powers for police to move on unauthorised traveller encampments with improved local site provisions.
The range of actions include:
Provide initial funding to facilitate the provision of temporary, transit and emergency stopping place sites for travellers.
As a first step the 2003/4 round of the Gypsy Site Refurbishment Programme will be revised so as to provide initial funding for temporary sites as well as continuing to provide money to help with the refurbishment of existing network local authority authorised sites. The details are currently being drawn up, and bidding guidance with full details will be issued in the autumn.
Produce new guidance on managing unauthorised camping.
The guidance will be informed by views both from the settled communities, including residents, business people and farmers, and travellers. The new guidance will in particular emphasise the need for effective local strategies which set out clearly lead responsibilities between local authorities and the police for taking action. The guidance will emphasise that the same standards of behaviour and regard for the law are expected from all sectors of the community, including regard for public health, proper disposal of waste and the conduct of business activities. The new guidance will be issued this Autumn.
Provide police with increased powers to move on unauthorised traveller encampments.
The police will have new eviction powers only where local authorities have made provision for temporary, transit and emergency stopping sites proportionate to the number of travellers that regularly pass through their area. This reflects the Government’s view that the use of stronger enforcement powers and adequate site provision must be linked.
Housing and Regeneration Minister Tony McNulty said the revised policy was a very positive step towards helping local authorities address the issue of unauthorised encampments by, amongst other things, improving site provision:
"Our strategy is balanced and fair. The standard of behaviour of travellers should be the same as that expected of the settled community and does not mean turning a blind eye to anti-social behaviour."
Home Office Minister John Denham said:
"Taken together this approach signifies the Government’s determination to provide a viable framework within which local agencies - in particular local authorities and the police - can respond to unauthorised camping in a way which recognises the needs and concerns of both the settled and traveller communities."

http://213.219.10.30/n_story.asp?item_id=136

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

News Release 026:
5 July 2002

A new approach to tackling unauthorised traveller camps
A radical overhaul of policy on unauthorised traveller encampments has been announced today to tackle public concern about nuisance and disorder arising from such encampments.

The Government's new strategy combines tough powers for police to move on unauthorised traveller encampments with improved local site provisions.

The range of actions include:

Providing initial funding to facilitate the provision of temporary, transit and emergency stopping place sites for travellers.

As a first step the 2003/4 round of the Gypsy Site Refurbishment Programme will be revised so as to provide initial funding for temporary sites as well as continuing to provide money to help with the refurbishment of existing network local authority authorised sites. The details are currently being drawn up, and bidding guidance with full details will be issued in the autumn.

Producing new guidance on managing unauthorised camping.

The guidance will be informed by views both from the settled communities, including residents, business people and farmers, and travellers. The new guidance will in particular emphasise the need for effective local strategies which set out clearly lead responsibilities between local authorities and the police for taking action. The guidance will emphasise that the same standards of behaviour and regard for the law are expected from all sectors of the community, including regard for public health, proper disposal of waste and the conduct of business activities. The new guidance will be issued this Autumn.

Providing police with increased powers to move on unauthorised traveller encampments.

The police will have new eviction powers only where local authorities have made provision for temporary, transit and emergency stopping sites proportionate to the number of travellers that regularly pass through their area. This reflects the Government's view that the use of stronger enforcement powers and adequate site provision must be linked.

Housing and Regeneration Minister Tony McNulty said the revised policy was a very positive step towards helping local authorities address the issue of unauthorised encampments, by amongst other things, improving site provision:

"Our strategy is balanced and fair. The standard of behaviour of travellers should be the same as that expected of the settled community. However, this does not mean turning a blind eye to anti-social behaviour.

Home Office Minister John Denham said:

"Taken together this approach signifies the Government's determination to provide a viable framework within which local agencies - in particular local authorities and the police - can respond to unauthorised camping in a way which recognises the needs and concerns of both the settled and traveller communities."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Media enquiries:
Home Office 020 7273 2465/2274
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister 020 7944 4603;
Out of hours: 020 7944 5925/5945
Public Enquiries Unit 020 7944 3000
E-mail: press@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
press@odpm.gsi.gov.uk
Web site www.homeoffice.gov.uk
http://www.odpm.gov.uk/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Published 5 July 2002

http://www.odpm.gov.uk/news/0207/0026.htm

Publication of the Traveller Law Reform Bill
A draft Bill to end discrimination between the laws that apply to Gypsies and Travellers, prepared by lawyers at Cardiff University, is published today (Thursday 31 January 2002).


Gypsies and Travellers, which represent substantial ethnic minority groups in the UK, have:

The highest infant mortality rates.
The lowest life expectancy.
The most appalling accommodation provisions.
Highest illiteracy rates.
The most racist press coverage.
Provoke the most complaints to the Commission for Racial Equality.
Have been seemingly excluded from the remit of the Social Exclusion Unit.
Are moved round and round the country at the cost of millions to local authorities and other landowners.

The Traveller Law Reform Bill is the product of over four years of discussion and collaboration by Gypsies and Travellers and their organisations and the statutory and voluntary sectors (including representatives from the police, local authorities, education and health providers, churches, equality organisations, lawyers and planners). The Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust has funded the technical drafting of the Bill which was undertaken by the Traveller Law Research Unit at Cardiff Law School, part of Cardiff University.

Many of the clauses in the Bill make important amendments to remove discriminatory statutory provisions. The Bill’s most significant innovation, however, concerns the extent to which it seeks to remove from the political stage decisions concerning site provision and site 'toleration'. In effect it creates self-enforcing provisions; measures which do not depend upon ‘political will’ for their subsequent enforcement. This is to be achieved by:


Creating a Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Commission which will be responsible for assessing the need for sites throughout England and Wales.
Local authorities will be required to facilitate site provision (by e.g. providing for planning permissions for owner occupied sites, 'tolerating' historic sites and collaborating with Housing Associations which will have power to provide develop and manage sites).
Local authorities which have failed to facilitate the provision of sufficient sites will have greater difficulty in evicting illegal encampments on their own land; likewise planning inspectors will have to have regard to such a failure when determining applications by Gypsies and Travellers for permission to develop their own sites.

An example of the other provisions in the Bill (designed to remove discrimination between the laws that apply to Travelling and non-Travelling people) concerns Gypsy site developments. Since 1994 there has been no duty on local authorities to provide accommodation for Gypsies and Travellers and no central government grant available to fund site construction.

On the other hand, local authorities have a duty to house certain people and the Housing Corporation has major resources to support the construction of public housing. The Bill removes the discrimination by extending the Housing Corporation’s powers to use its resources to support caravan site development.

Gypsy and Traveller organisations will lobby MPs and Lords to adopt the reform proposal with a view to its introduction as a Private Members Bill. It is hoped, however, that the Government will implement various of the non-contentious provisions when the opportunity arises, via general legislation (e.g. a general housing or education or criminal justice Act)

The Bill is the first major initiative in relation to the law affecting Gypsies and Travellers since the Caravan Sites Act (CSA) 1968. The CSA was also introduced as a Private Members Bill by Eric Lubbock MP (now Lord Avebury). Lord Avebury chairs an Advisory Committee consisting of representatives of many Gypsy and Traveller organisations, which has also been influential in shaping the terms of the Bill.

- ends -

Notes for editors

For further information see the contact list attached.


The Traveller Law Research Unit is a specialist unit within the Law School of Cardiff University. The Unit has, since its creation in 1995, undertaken research for a number of charitable foundations, and aims to promote law reform and provide services of benefit to Travelling people.
A copy of the Bill, Explanatory memorandum, ‘Brief Guide’ and specific statistics relating to these matters are available on the internet at www.cf.ac.uk/claws/tlru/bill. A preview copy of the Bill is also available on request from TLRU-L@cardiff.ac.uk
Contemporary images of Gypsy and Travellers that may be used in articles covering this development (subject to acknowledgement of their source) are available from Cardiff University’s Public Relations Office. Contact Debra Lewis on 029 2087 4499, email: LewisD4@cf.ac.uk
There are between 200,000 and 300,000 Travelling People in the United Kingdom. The majority of these people are Gypsies - whether English, Welsh or Scottish - and Irish Travellers, racial groups under the protection of the Race Relations Acts. At least 1/3 of these people have no safe, legal and secure stopping place, and many such people have no access to water, refuse disposal and other essential services.

Contacts for further information at Cardiff University:

Rachel Morris,
Traveller Law Research Unit
Cardiff Law School
029 2087 4580,
mob: 07092 000570
MorrisRC1@cf.ac.uk

Debra Lewis,
Cardiff University Press Office
029 2087 4499,
mob: 07970 963633
LewisD4@cf.ac.uk

Luke Clements,
Traveller Law Research Unit
Cardiff Law School
029 2087 5454
ClementsLJ@cf.ac.uk


Contacts for further information nationally:


The Lord Avebury
The House of Lords
Westminster, London
020 7274 4617
ericavebury@hotmail.com

Alan Beckley
Traveller Project
(Retired police officer)
07967 114949
Abeckley@aol.com

Sarah Cemlyn, School for Policy Studies
University of Bristol
0117 954 6776
Sarah.Cemlyn@bris.ac.uk

Sarah Cox, Barrister
Berwin Leighton Paisner, London
020 7427 1605
sarah.cox@berwinleightonpaisner.com

Terry Holland
Gypsy Services Manager
Buckinghamshire County Council
01296 382666
tholland@buckscc.gov.uk

Murray Hunt,
Barrister
Matrix Chambers, Gray’s Inn
020 7404 3447
murrayhunt@matrixlaw.co.uk

Yvonne MacNamara
BIAS Irish Travellers Project
London
01273 234777

Frieda Schicker,
Project Co-ordinator
London Gypsy & Traveller Unit
020 8533 2002
lgtu@breathemail.net
Lucy Beckett,
Head of Service
Advisory Service for the Education of Travellers
Oxford
01865 428089
traved@a-s-e-t.demon.co.uk

Bromley Gypsy and Traveller Project
(James Revell /Joan Payne)
St Mary Cray, Kent
01689 839052 /
020 8777 8009

Dr Colin Clark,
Dept of Sociology & Social Policy
University of Newcastle
0191 222 7494 /
07900 224485
Colin.Clark@ncl.ac.uk

Sylvia Dunn,
President
National Association of Gypsy Women
Rayleigh,
Essex
01268 782792

Pat Holmes,
Co-ordinator
West Midlands Consortium Education
Service for Travelling Children
01902 614646
wmcestc@dial.pipex.com

Dr Donald Kenrick
(Expert on planning, linguistics, history)
020 7727 2916
dken@globalnet.co.uk

Emma Nuttall / Alex Pickles
Friends, Families and Travellers, Brighton
020 8459 7638 / 01269 870621
fft@communitybase.org.uk

Tim Wilson,
Liaison Officer
Cardiff Gypsy Sites Group
029 2021 4411
tim@cgsg.fsnet.co.uk

Castlemorton 10th Anniversary Free Festival/Rave

May 31-June 5 2002: Steart Beach, Somerset : Over ten thousand people gatheredfor the biggest impromptu free festival-rave since the Criminal Justice Act kiboshed the scene. Matt Smith was there to witness the mass gathering of the sound system tribes and sent this despatch back to SQUALL

A massive free festival sprang up over the Jubilee weekend in the shadow of a West Country nuclear power station, the like of which has not been seen for a decade. Not only was it the 50th anniversary of the Queens coronation; it was also the 10th anniversary of the Castlemorton Free Festival.

Back then some 10,000 people united on a common near Malvern, in a massive celebration of dance culture’s power for over a week; fuelled by the music of traveller sound systems like Spiral Tribe, Bedlam, Circus Warp and DIY. The event’s huge popularity gave the then Conservative Government just the excuse it was looking for to conjure into existence one of the biggest nails in the coffin of freedom this country has ever seen, the infamous and reviled 1994 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act.

This time around it was to be the turn of Steart Beach, near Bridgwater, Somerset to play host to over twenty sound systems; and anywhere between ten and fifteen thousand people, if you believe the Western Daily Press. Originally billed as the "Feeling of Life" festival, the hype had been growing for months. Rumours flew of a group of land owners wanting to provide a selection of sites, some of the original Spiral DJ line up putting together a rig especially for the occasion, a purpose built Europe wide word of mouth network for publicity, a special team of Chinese interpreters to decode all the whispers. In the end all it took was for a great idea to catch the public imagination, with nobody really certain of the venue until the last minute.

In a distinct contrast to the BBC’s pre-Jubilee proclamation that the Queen wished the nation to go out and celebrate her coronation; the police operation to stop the event stretched across the country. Major surveillance was launched along the M5, the M50 towards Malvern, and the A46 in Gloucestershire. By lunchtime an estimated 1000 people at Michael Woods services on the M5 were being harassed by hovering helicopters and riot police. Smaller satellite parties that sprung up later that afternoon near Abergavenny in Wales, and on Minchinhampton Common near Stroud were busted early on, with the loss of three sound systems in a spate of state sponsored theft.

There have been reports of parties being busted in the North as far up as Halifax. Only on Dartmoor, near Okehampton, Devon, it seems, were people allowed to go about their business unmolested. One of the most worrying developments over the weekend was the use of special rave riot police; identifiable by the small fluorescent green acid smiley face stickers positioned on either side of their ID numbers on the back of their helmets. A Police spokeswoman interviewed by the Big Issue on this very subject has mysteriously tried to deny that this was the case, putting it down to "coincidence". But just check out the pictures.

By late Saturday afternoon Steart had become the popular solution to a choice of venue. With at least ten rigs up and running on the beach, Police raced to close access to the area, blocking each of the four access roads, causing a huge pile up of traffic in the remote country roads. For a while, even the Bridgwater turn-off at junction 23 on the M5, some 15 miles away, was blocked to the public. At one roadblock the congestion became so great, that a senior officer had to be dropped off by helicopter in order to resolve the situation, and finally grant access to the festival as dusk fell. The direct consequence of this late decision was to cause chaos on site, as festival-goers tried to negotiate the severely rutted and rough access roads. Many vehicles sustained damage, turned over or became stuck in the soft ground due to the lack of visibility.

By Sunday morning the site had reached gridlock along the four-mile beach and common, but the atmosphere was one of jubilation. There was a live punk stage, a couple of dub systems, and just about every genre of dance music from disco to gabba. There were so many rigs that some people didn’t even bother to set up. There were people present from Brighton, London, Scotland, Sheffield, Nottingham and Leeds; from just about every region of the United Kingdom. There were French people, Italians, Dutch; an amazingly cosmopolitan assortment for an isolated Somerset backwater.

Who knows how many people might have attended, were it not for the sustained campaign of intimidation. Surely this is one of the questions that must be asked, for when so many people take the decision to pursue an objective, in direct opposition to the letter of the law, it must cast doubt on the validity of the legislation put in place to oppose their point of view.

In a mighty contrast to the no pay, no play festivals currently being foisted on the great British public by unscrupulous and mercenary councils and promoters, the beer was only a quid a can, £1.50 if you were unlucky. Food was about £2.00 a plate. There was no entrance fee, the event being open to all. The performers did a fantastic job and did not demand the equivalent of an annual national minimum wage for a one off couple of hours work. The usual private armies of petty crims masquerading as security were just not necessary, and there were children playing everywhere in unsupervised safety as proof. Everybody who had the foresight, ingenuity and necessary work ethic to make themselves some money actually got paid, on time, and got to keep it. This is in distinct contrast to recent pay festivals such as the Bristol Essential Festival where angry and ripped off punters are currently demanding an investigation of the event by Trading Standards.

As ever the festival benefited from the organic nature of its formation, no playlists, no headline acts, no performer/punter segregation; just people coming together to create an atmosphere and entertainment with their very presence. Trouble is, that kind of thing is difficult to turn into a product and sell.

Perhaps the only downside to the event was the spaced-out idiot who took to torching any damaged car found to be vulnerable. As usual it has been reported that there were used needles everywhere, but that will always be the case as long as mainstream media need to sell copy to a readership used to having their prejudices pandered to. There were a number of people; especially the group of crusties using an empty pushchair as a mobile shop; however, who resorted to selling rocks. Openly offering pebbles collected from the beach for sale. Conscious of the high profile nature of this event, quite a few vehicle number plates were covered by their occupants and this too provoked some problems; with quite a few undercover police caught trying to uncover and record the hidden data.

This was not the first time that Steart Beach has provided a venue to events of this sort. It has been used as a harmless, out of the way party venue for years, and in 1995 provided a last ditch venue to thousands of people who turned up at Smeatharpe, a nearby abandoned airfield, for a free festival called 'The Mother'; held to celebrate the first year of opposition to the CJA. On that occasion roads for a twelve-mile radius were blocked around the airfield, and Steart again provided refuge. On that occasion festival-goers were road-blocked onto site for nearly a week along with rigs like Immersion, Sunnyside and DIY, under a four mile exclusion zone manned by Police, and Army personnel.

Since rave exploded into the public domain some 15 years ago, dance music has been used to implement legislation designed to outlaw any real freedom of association and many other civil liberties. Surveillance of society on every level has expanded, with a massive network of CCTV implemented, face recognition software developed, compulsory DNA profiling and record keeping on arrest, digital communication and financial transaction monitoring, and effective peaceful protest virtually reduced to Police discretion. The latest development in this trend are proposals to force telecom and internet companies to reveal all content and location details of phone and internet communication to a whole gamut of Govt agencies without the need for a court order. This means that for a start, that every mobile phone will become a personal tracking device.

It is now pretty much impossible to travel, communicate or trade without somebody having access to the information, and society is constantly required to take it for granted that our state is a benevolent one. Choiceless conformity and enforced dependency are fast becoming prerequisites for full access to society, while the murky threat of terrorism is being used to all but shut down any real right to privacy or anonymity. Politicians are even grooming our children for the future acceptance of compulsory ID cards via schemes like "age" cards.

Free party rave and festival culture challenges this. Events like this break with the need for marketing and advertising, they do not need to be sold to their punters to be successful, and this makes them truly democratic. They have no employer/employee structure, and every single person setting out to attend this event made a political decision and voted with their feet. In the end authority will seek to apportion blame, to identify the "criminals", so the fines can be meted out, and justice served; but the beauty of events like this are that they are really a product of raw demand, and it is the lawmakers themselves who are guilty of foisting their prejudices and hidden agendas on a population sold the false belief that a vote actually makes a difference.

Mainstream festivals are forced to buy into a state licensed protection operation to acquire licences. Councils have to be paid off, police bills paid, private security companies taken on. When most punters are already forking out a hefty wedge from their annual income in the form of Council tax and the annual Police bill payments; it seems a bit rich for organisers to pass on these costs in the form of inflated entrance fees, effectively forcing punters into paying their bills twice for the privilege of indulging in their entertainment of choice, and making the promoters a massive profit in the process.

Just go see Glastonbury. For years it has benefited from the thousands of people who get in for nothing. The event pays for itself, all the traders benefit from increase trade, it raises massive amounts for charity, and brings a vast amount of money into the South West’s coffers. Yet this year it is being punished for its previously altruistic entrance policy. The existence of one of the UK’s foremost cultural events is now being threatened by the same councillors that have been paid off by the event for years. "Overcrowding" apparently threatens safety, yet its safety record over the years speaks for itself, with the "overcrowding" unchecked. It is not possible to guarantee public safety on the streets of most major cities on an average Saturday night, let alone at in a temporary tent city of entertainment and diversity built to house a transient population of thousands. The event has become a victim of the power of its own popularity and success. But then again perhaps it is the prospect of 250,000 fully televised people choosing to openly consume illegal drugs, drink to excess and generally have it large for a weekend once a year; is at odds with the national image desired by our Govt’s PR machine. Who can tell?

The original Castlemorton offered a lifeline to a massive community that openly rejected mainstream hypocritical authority, a glimmer of a means of funding their lifestyle choices. For years the authorities had been trying to shut down the traveller/festival lifestyle and since the Battle of the Beanfield massacre had fairly well managed to instil fear into anyone making those kind of decisions. Then along came rave and offered that culture a whole new means of empowerment and thus survival.

At the same time a whole new industry was born, and after the CJA was passed, assimilation became the keyword. Knowing that a people’s need to party could not be compromised, authority took a leaf out the Roman Empire’s book, and brought rave in-house, clubbing came of age, and everybody was happy because the wedge was once again heading in the right direction. Into Govt coffers and tricky dicky business peoples bank accounts, instead of the pockets of ordinary, decent, hard working folk. Then back came the free festival to illuminate the lie.

Finally, there is one post festival story that has come to light concerning the home of a long time and well-known member of the Bristol free party crew Mutant Dance. Having spent all weekend at the festival this individual returned home to find his flat ransacked and all his computer equipment vanished; including a database of some 12,000 names and phone numbers compiled over the years from their text messaging service.

Let the big shout go out to everybody who risked life, limb, property and freedom to celebrate that which is right and bright.
Matt Smith

---

Well, there were 20 rigs plus, some flippin massive, one from Holland even, Saturday afternoon/evening saw a 4 hour stand off with Police with at least a mile of road completely blocked as ravers were denied access to party site by riot police until just before dark. A senior officer was even dropped off by helicopter in a next door field to resolve the situation because of the amount of traffic trying to gain entry. Special rave riot police were present identifiable by small fluorescent smiley faces on their helmets. The operation to stop this event stretched across the west country with a big surveillance operation mounted to keep an eye on the M5, M50, and along the A46. There were reports of one rig actually confiscated on Saturday afternoon, and one forcibly escorted out of the area. Several smaller parties and meeting points were also busted. Similar events also happened near Abergavenny in Wales and at Minchinhampton Common near Stroud. By Sunday morning the site at Steart was gridlocked along the length of the 4 mile beach and common. At its height on Sunday night attendance must have reached 10,000. There were people present from around the country from Brighton to Scotland, from Cornwall to London, and a fair number of French and Italians too. Anyone who has any more detail or info, please share as it would be good to build up a record of experiences and try to get an idea of the scale of what went on.
Cheers
Matt

---

Think this is some of what roddy and others mean. Spook tools, from the dirty tricks dept....

Hard to determine though, of it's some teen with a baseball hat, or, a real spook.....

Scary though eh?

data interception by remote transmission :> http://www.codexdatasystems.com/menu.html

Critical Infrastructure Protection in the Information Age - US Executive Order :> http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/10/20011016-12.html

NET Observe Spy Software :> http://www.spy-software-solutions.com/net-observe.htm

iDefence :> http://www.idefense.com/flashintro.html

EU's secret network to spy on anti-capitalist protesters

The Independent
By Stephen Castle in Brussels
20 August 2001


Leading article: Police co-operation must not trample on protesters' rights European leaders have ordered police and intelligence agencies to co-ordinate their efforts to identify and track the anti-capitalist demonstrators whose violent protests at recent international summits culminated in the shooting dead by police of a young protester at the Genoa G8 meeting last month.
The new measures clear the way for protesters travelling between European Union countries to be subjected to an unprecedented degree of surveillance.
Confidential details of decisions taken by Europe's interior ministers at talks last month show that the authorities will use a web of police and judicial links to keep tabs on the activities and whereabouts of protesters. Europol, the EU police intelligence-sharing agency based in The Hague that was set up to trap organised criminals and drug traffickers, is likely to be given a key role.
The plan has alarmed civil rights campaigners, who argue that personal information on people who have done no more than take part in a legal demonstration may be entered into a database and exchanged.
Calls for a new Europe-wide police force to tackle the threat from hardline anti-capitalists were led after the Genoa summit by Germany's Interior Minister, Otto Schily. Germany has long pushed for the creation of a Europe-wide crime-fighting agency modelled on the FBI.
Germany's EU partners rejected Mr Schily's call, judging that a new force to combat political protest movements was too controversial, but ministers agreed to extend the measures that can be taken under existing powers. Central to the new push is the secretive Article 36 committee (formerly known as the K4 committee) and the Schengen Information System, both of which allow for extensive contact and data sharing between police forces.
Under the new arrangements, European governments and police chiefs will:
· Set up permanent contact points in every EU country to collect, analyse and exchange information on protesters;
· Create a pool of liaison officers before each summit staffed by police from countries from which "risk groups" originate;
· Use "police or intelligence officers" to identify "persons or groups likely to pose a threat to public order and security";
· Set up a task force of police chiefs to organise "targeted training" on violent protests.

The new measures will rely on two main ways of exchanging police information. The Schengen Information System, which provides basic information, and a supporting network called Sirene - Supplementary Information Request at the National Entry. This network (of which Britain is a member) allows pictures, fingerprints and other information to be sent to police or immigration officials once a suspect enters their territory. Each country already has a Sirene office with established links to EU and Nordic law enforcement agencies.
Civil liberties campaigners are dismayed by the plan. Tony Bunyan, editor of Statewatch magazine, said: "This will give the green light to Special Branch and MI5 to put under surveillance people whose activities are entirely democratic."
Nicholas Busch, co-ordinator of the Fortress Europe network on civil liberties issues, added: "People who have done nothing against the law ought to be able to feel sure they are not under surveillance ... By criminalising whole political and social scenes you fuel confrontation and conflict."
Thomas Mathieson, professor of sociology of law at the University of Oslo, said police could have access to "very private information" about people's religion, sex lives and politics. "It is a very dangerous situation from the civil liberties point of view," he said.

---

I dunno, just interested to know that this sort of thing goes on .......

Data Interception by Remote Transmission

D.I.R.T.TM - Data Interception by Remote Transmission is a powerful remote control monitoring tool that allows stealth monitoring of all activity on one or more target computers simultaneously from a remote command center.
No physical access is necessary. Application also allows agents to remotely seize and secure digital evidence prior to physically entering suspect premises.

Codex Data Systems, Inc. will provide our D.I.R.T. software for FREE to all US law enforcement agencies, US Intelligence agencies and US Military agencies to aid in the apprehension or identification of the persons responsible for the events
of September 11, 2001 in New York and Washington, D.C.

Your agency's use of our D.I.R.T. software will remain classified by us
and will not be advertised, disclosed publicly or disclosed to any third party.

Please contact our CEO directly to arrange the expeditious transfer
of our technology to your agency.

Assisting the law enforcement community since June 6th, 1998
Requirements: Agency letterhead is required before information will be forwarded on this product. Sale is restricted to bona fide law enforcement, governmental and military agencies. Codex Data Systems, Inc. is the creator and sole source of this product.

http://www.codexdatasystems.com/menu.html

These two articles, [Thanks Roddy !!] continue to show the thrust of the governments' wish to 'snoop' on the citizen.

Although it's already done widely, with various other 'legal devices' to justify action, RIP will now allow, for 'Data Mining' and 'Crime Patern Analysis'.

This basicall, will provide alsorts of opertunities for mis-carrages of justice to occur. So much stress on the way. Am I entitled to discent? or must i always go around proving i'm not a criminal / terrorist / child and sheep molester.

Oh god! why are governments alway so worried about about the citizen under them? Is it something to do with 'Vested Interest' me thinks. Cant they go around trying to 'represent us' rather than trying to 'keep us down'

Any advice on these matters, gratefully recieved.

---

ISPs face data interception deadline
17:03 Wednesday 10th July 2002
Matt Loney

From 1 August, ISPs in the UK will be required to be able to intercept your data. Yet the Home Office has failed to explain how they will be reimbursed. And the rules mean that criminals will easily be able to avoid interception
ISPs across the UK will have to start intercepting and storing electronic communications including emails, faxes and Web surfing data from 1 August, but there still appear to be glaring loopholes in the legislation.

Not only has the Home Office still failed to tell ISPs how they will be compensated for maintaining their interception capabilities, but the measures, which the government said were introduced to combat terrorism and organised crime, only apply to large ISPs. Any criminal organisation wishing to avoid interception simply has to find an ISP that has fewer than 10,000 customers.

The interception capability is mandated by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA), which was introduced to give police and other law enforcement authorities the same powers to intercept digital communications as they already possess to intercept telephone calls and letters. On 1 August, the RIP (Maintenance of Interception Capability) Order 2002 is due to come into force.

Several classes of communications service providers are exempt from the regulations: those which do not intend to supply services to more than 10,000 people in the UK, and financial institutions such as banking, insurance and investment houses.

Not every big ISP will have to provide an interception capability from day one, but if they are told by police or other law enforcement officers that an interception has been authorised, they have one working day to provide a mechanism to do so. Furthermore, they must ensure that the intercepted data is transmitted in real time to the person who applied for the warrant

Each service provider must be able to simultaneously intercept the communications of up to 1 in every 10,000 people who use its service.

But with only weeks to go, ISPs say they have still not been told how they will be reimbursed for the cost of intercepting communications data. A spokesperson for the ISP Association said, "We have not been provided too much detail (on costs). There are still a lot of issues that have to be resolved."

Part of the problem, said the spokesman, is that the new regulations are also intertwined with the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, which says that ISPs and telcos have to store communications data.

"They are producing a code of practice that lays out types of data that should be retained and how long it should be retained for," said the spokesman.

The trouble, is, he said, that for ISPs to install all the capabilities will cost a lot of money: "Dealing with the two laws will have a big impact on cost and the Government has to provide guidance." Costs will come from storage, staff time, new management processes, setup and running costs, said the spokesman, and will vary because each ISP is likely to have a different method of intercepting and storing the data and managing access.

A Home Office spokesperson said, "arrangements will be put in place to ensure they (ISPs) will receive fair refunds for costs incurred," but could not provide details.

Claire Walker, a solicitor with city law firm Olswang, who specialises in e-commerce, said part of the problem is that the Home Office does not have a technical perspective. "They tend to say to ISPs, 'tell us what is involved,' and then the ISPs say, 'no, you tell us exactly what you want first and then we'll tell you what is involved,'" said Walker. "It is likely that individual ISPs will reach individual agreements with the Home Office on reimbursement."

Tim Snape, who chairs the law enforcement group ISPA, told ZDNet UK earlier this year that the costs of intercepting could, in combination with the costs of logging data, be crippling. "The actual data acquisition costs could be low," he said, "but the costs for data retention, processing, hand-over, billing, management and regulatory compliance will all be very high."

Although RIPA has a provision for ISPs to recover their costs, said Snape at the time, this does not mean profit. "We don't want to be seen profiting from crime, so we have asked for just cost recovery," he said. "But because this means there will be a requirement to demonstrate costs, there will be a requirement to audit so the process of cost recovery will incur its own costs."

Sources close to the negotiations say it has been suggested to the Home Office that the compensation to industry should merely cover the storage costs.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2118894,00.html



RIPA demands push up ISP costs
16:41 Tuesday 9th July 2002
Paul Stevens, Olswang


Overshadowed by last month's furore over public authorities' access to e-mail and telephone data, another set of new RIPA rules is due to hit the communications industry next month
From 1st August, ISPs and telcos will be obliged to maintain certain minimum levels of interception capacity in order to assist law enforcement agencies. The cost to the industry of implementing these controversial measures, however, remains unclear.

Background

These new obligations are contained in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Maintenance of Interception Capability) Order 2002 (the "Order"). This 'fleshes out' provisions under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 ('RIPA') which give the Home Secretary power to order a provider of public telecoms services to maintain a "reasonable" level of intercept capacity to enable interception warrants to be complied with. Consultation with industry on this issue took place between December 2000 and August 2001.

ISPs are expressing their confusion over the new obligations and how they will be recompensed. The actual obligations are as follows.

The new obligations in more detail

The Order imposes new legal obligations on providers of public telecommunications services, although service providers who do not (or do not intend to) provide their service to over 10,000 users in the UK are exempt, as are providers who limit their services to the banking, insurance, investment or other financial services sectors.

The 'intercept capacity' which service providers are required to provide is as follows:

A mechanism for implementing interceptions within one working day of the service provider being informed that the interception has been authorised;

Where the service provider serves more than 10,000 people, to enable the simultaneous interception of communications of up to 1 in 10, 000 of those users;

To ensure the interception of all communications and related traffic data authorised by the warrant and their simultaneous transmission to the law enforcement agency in question;

To ensure the intercepted communication and data can be correlated;

To ensure the handover interface complies with any requirements stipulated by the Home Secretary (these should generally be in line with agreed industry standards);

To ensure filtering to provide isolated traffic data, associated with the relevant account where reasonable;

To ensure any protection applied to the intercepted communication can be removed;

To minimise the risk of "tipping-off" the interception subject or other unauthorised persons about the interception. Where a service provider is unhappy with the extent or compliance cost of an interception notice, a referral can be made to the National Technical Advisory Board ('TAB'), a body comprised of industry as well as Government representatives. Non-compliance with these interception obligations carries civil penalties, including issue of an injunction.

Cost implications

The cost burden on the telecoms industry of implementing the new measures is potentially substantial. RIPA imposes a duty on the Secretary of State to ensure that a service provider receives a "fair contribution" towards the cost of complying with an interception warrant or maintaining intercept capability. A sum of £20 million has been earmarked for communications provider support for the three years from 2001 to 2004 in connection with broader RIPA obligations, of which £14 million was spent last year. Further consultations are due to take place between the Government, industry and the TAB on the precise costs to the industry of complying with these new rules but no timetable has yet been set.

The bigger picture

RIPA, which has been on the statute book since July 2000, has been the source of enormous controversy since the proposals for reform of the interception regime were first published three years ago. Recently, in a much-publicised climb-down, the Home Secretary David Blunkett withdrew a proposal to extend the range of public authorities with power to access details of people's communications under the Act.

Although the Act received Royal Assent nearly two years ago, its wide-ranging provisions have been brought into force by a series of statutory instruments since then. The most recent include an Interception of Communications Code of Practice which came into force on 1 July 2002 and which outlines the duties of law enforcement agencies with regard to interception of telephone and internet communications for national security and crime prevention purposes. Codes of Practice regulating the use of other covert surveillance techniques are also due to come into force on 1st August.

The information contained in this bulletin is intended as a general overview of the subjects featured and detailed specialist advice should always be taken before taking or refraining from taking any action

http://techupdate.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t481-s2118813,00.html

19-21 July - Video Activist Training Weekend, Oxford.

There are still a few places left for a video activism residential course in Oxford - and its free.
Call 01865 203661or email hamish_campbell@hotmail.com to book your place.


Tash says: " I've been on it, and it think its a really worthwhile. Take this as an official recommendation" mind you, still a little scared of video, being a still photographer! am working on it though :-)

What did you do in the EC0-war daddy?

Did you stand up, did you speak up enough?
Was it your voice that shouted?
Were you there when it counted?
Where were you when the tide turned?
Did you act with honour?
Did you think about the future?
Did you know that one day
................... I'll be standing there with you?"

I just thought, that there should be more pictures, so here's some ....

After 30 years of campaigning, and general stress. The Home Sec has finally announced the re-classification of Cannabis from B to C. A classification, invented under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1972. This will enable the police to 'do' less to the individual.


HOWEVER


It is not legal, and is still thought of a moral wrong.....


'tis better than nothing, but we have no-where near won an argument and got what we want.


Following on from here, have prepared a spread of press, over the last year, to show the progress of all this.


Still, gotta be worth, lighting up a spliff today to celebrate some movement though! The most liberal change in a generation.


Oh, by the way, this is just an 'announcement of change'. The actual change, well, not until NEXT JULY 2003.


Oh god! the fight continues .........

---

Cannabis laws softened, but new crackdown on dealers
By Ian Burrell, Home Affairs Correspondent
Independent
11 July 2002

David Blunkett allowed police to retain powers to arrest people for cannabis possession yesterday, yielding to critics who accused him of going soft on drugs.
The Home Secretary announced to Parliament that he was reclassifying the drug from Class B to Class C, the most important change to Britain's drugs laws in modern times. But instead of a blanket downgrading of the offence of cannabis possession, he said that the police would still be able to apprehend users of the drug in certain circumstances.
Mr Blunkett told the House of Commons: "They will be able to arrest for possession where public order is threatened or where children are a risk."
The Home Secretary also said he was considering a new criminal offence of supplying illegal drugs to children. In addition, he will raise the maximum sentence for dealing in Class C drugs to 14 years, the current ultimate penalty for supplying Class B drugs.
Because the changes will require primary legislation they will not come into effect for another 12 months, delaying once again what drug law reformers had hoped would be a substantial shift indrug policy. Despite the concessions to hardliners, the decision to go ahead with reclassification prompted a furious response from those opposed to any softening of the law.
Mr Blunkett was embarrassed yesterday morning when the former drugs tsar Keith Hellawell went on national radio to announce that he had resigned his post as international drugs adviser to the Government.
Mr Hellawell said his decision was in protest at the relaxation of the law on cannabis.
Claiming that the reclassification would lead to "euphoria amongst drug dealers" he said: "The perception now, certainly in Britain, is that the Government doesn't care about personal possession of cannabis, which gives a totally misleading message to parents, children and the public as a whole."
Downing Street claimed to be "bemused" by Mr Hellawell's position, saying he had been supportive of proposals to reclassify cannabis during meetings with Mr Blunkett and other Home Office ministers.
In the Commons, Mr Blunkett was accused by Oliver Letwin, the shadow Home Secretary, of landing the Government with a "massive liability" and the country's communities with "the prospect of social disaster".
Mr Letwin told MPs that the policy would send out "deeply confusing mixed messages" and would in effect "give control over cannabis to the drugs dealers with the police turning away".
Mr Blunkett admitted that until to two years ago he was against reclassification. He said: "But I have been convinced by the evidence, by the need to target hard drug dealers, by the way we can clamp down on the ones who are threatening the lives of young people across the country."
The Home Secretary faced further criticism from his own backbenchers, with Kate Hoey, MP for Vauxhall, criticising the effects of a Metropolitan Police experiment on cannabis reclassification in her constituency in south London.
She told Mr Blunkett: "There are more drug dealers than ever and there are more people using cannabis. In 10 or 20 years' time, are you certain we will not look back on this day as the one where we got it wrong?"
The Home Secretary claimed that the so-called Lambeth Experiment had led to a 10 per cent increase in the capture of Class A drug dealers and a 10 per cent fall in robberies.
Chris Mullin, chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee, which recently called for a softening of the cannabis laws, said reclassification was "plain common sense". But Mr Blunkett said he had rejected the committee's suggestions that ecstasy should be made a Class B drug and that heroin users should be given access to safe injecting rooms.
Roger Howard, chief executive of the charity DrugScope, said that by dismissing the idea of injecting rooms, Mr Blunkett had "missed a golden opportunity".
He described the Home Secretary's package of drug reforms as ranging from the "impressively forward-looking to the dangerously short-sighted". He said people could still be jailed for two years for possession of cannabis.

The key points
* Cannabis to be reclassified from Class B to Class C drug.
* Police to retain powers of arrest for cannabis possession in certain circumstances.
* Possible new criminal offence of supplying any illegal drugs to children.
* Maximum sentence for dealing in Class C drugs to be 14 years.
* Changes will not come into effect for 12 months.
* No change in classification of ecstasy as Class B drug, and no plans for heroin users to be given access to safe injecting rooms, so-called shooting galleries.

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/story.jsp?story=313994

Police retain discretion over arrest for cannabis use
Cannabis is reclassified, but the Home Secretary refuses to introduce reforms to the regulations on heroin and ecstasy
By Ian Burrell, Home Affairs Correspondent
Independent
11 July 2002

Dopesmokers who had rolled a celebratory joint in honour of the Home Secretary finally relaxing Britain's cannabis laws may have spluttered in frustration yesterday when David Blunkett decided possession of the drug should remain an arrestable offence.
Although the Home Secretary went ahead as expected with his proposal to reclassify cannabis from Class B to Class C, he appeared to have reacted to criticisms that he was "going soft on drugs".
And so instead of implementing a blanket policy treating marijuana possession as a non-arrestable offence, he announced a hybrid system, under which police could hold some people caught with the drug, in certain circumstances.
Those who smoke cannabis near a school or repeatedly light up in a public place where other people object to their drug use could still find themselves being marched to the police station.
The caveats will please police officers who have complained of having joints waved defiantly in their faces by drug users in Brixton, south London, where the Metropolitan Police has been piloting a softer stance on cannabis.
But they will also allow police to retain a considerable degree of discretion in dealing with cannabis users. Welcoming Mr Blunkett's announcement yesterday, the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) said: "The retention of the police power of arrest will enable the police to have greater flexibility in dealing with incidents on the street."
Such powers will worry supporters of cannabis decriminalisation, who would point to a recent study by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation that appeared to show a minority of officers were already pursuing something of a personal crusade against marijuana.
The study found that 3 per cent of police were responsible for 20 per cent of cannabis possession arrests and that some police saw it as their duty to help rid society of all drugs.
Mr Blunkett said yesterday Acpo would soon issue national guidelines to police forces, explaining the definition of the "aggravating circumstances" that would make cannabis possession arrestable.
Drugs agencies hope the guidance will help to create a level playing field and end the "postcode lottery" that results from different approaches being taken to the drug in neighbouring police divisions. Mr Blunkett said the guidelines would "ensure that in the vast majority of cases officers will confiscate the drug and issue a warning".
If this is the case, the changes will have a noticeable effect on the policing of cannabis, which in the year 2000 led to 75,000 arrests for possession, with some offenders being fined and a small minority imprisoned.
Last night Roger Howard, chief executive of the charity DrugScope, pointed out that even after reclassification people could face being sent to jail for up to two years for "simple possession".
He also voiced concerns over Mr Blunkett's proposals for tougher measures against those involved in the supply of cannabis. Mr Blunkett said he would consider a new offence of supplying the drug to children and would retain a maximum sentence of up to 14 years for dealing, even after downgrading the drug to Class C.
Mr Howard said people who supplied the drug to friends or grew cannabis plants may find themselves facing a custodial sentence.
Yesterday in Brixton, where police have piloted the idea of relaxing the laws on cannabis, there were mixed views on the project's success.
An unnamed police officer claimed the project had not worked and said that school children who were smoking cannabis with impunity were no longer being arrested and referred to drug workers.
But Bashir Ahmed, who runs a carpet shop, said the change in the law would cut crime. He called for legalised cannabis cafés to end the street dealing.
Other commentators warned that the reclassification of cannabis should not disguise the potential dangers of the drug.
David Hart, general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers, said the softening of the law should "not make a blind bit of difference to school drug policies".
The changes to the cannabis laws were accompanied by a refusal to introduce reform of the regulations on heroin and ecstasy. In spite of recommendations to the contrary by the House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, Mr Blunkett refused to reclassify ecstasy as a class B drug and rejected the idea of controlled "shooting galleries" for injecting drug users.
Although it was overshadowed by the cannabis reforms, the refusal to provide safe injecting rooms will be a severe disappointment to drug treatment professionals.
The introduction of such a scheme in Australia reportedly led to 17 drug users being resuscitated after overdosing in the first month of the project's operation. Supporters of the scheme claim that without such supervised facilities such people might have died.
Drug experts were also angry that Mr Blunkett, as a politician, chose to dismiss the reclassification of ecstasy [which was also backed by a review of drugs laws by the independent Police Foundation] rather than allow a decision to be taken by the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs.
Narcotics: how they are classified
Class A: (The most harmful category). Includes heroin, cocaine, ecstasy, LSD, and amphetamines (speed) if prepared for injection. Maximum sentence for dealing is life and seven years for possession.
Class B: (An intermediate category). Includes amphetamines and barbiturates. The maximum sentence for dealing is 14 years in prison plus a fine, and for possession it is five years plus fine.
Class C: (Least harmful). Includes anabolic steroids, anti-depressants and growth hormones. In July next year this will be joined by cannabis and cannabis resin, which are currently Class B. Maximum sentences for dealing in Class C substances are to be upped from five years to 14. The maximum term for possession is two years in jail.

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/story.jsp?story=313981

Decline and fall of 'tsar' stripped of his power
By Ian Burrell
Independent
11 July 2002

When David Blunkett was appointed Home Secretary in May last year, one of his first decisions was to axe the role of drugs tsar.
Keith Hellawell, the first and probably last incumbent in the post, had been appointed with a fanfare by Tony Blair in 1997 but found himself unceremoniously dumped. To Mr Blunkett, the cross-departmental role of the "UK Anti-Drugs Co-ordinator" had served its purpose. The Home Secretary wanted the Home Office to take back responsibility for drugs so he could pursue his own plans for reform of the laws. Mr Hellawell, who was retained in a part-time international advisory role, claiming that he no longer wanted a full-time position, was marginalised.
Commenting on the former drugs tsar's resignation yesterday, Roger Howard, chief executive of the influential charity DrugScope, and Simon Hughes, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, described Mr Hellawell as "out of touch".
It was a sad indictment of a man who had laid the building blocks of the Government's drugs policy.
The former chief constable of West Yorkshire was responsible for drawing up a 10-year drugs strategy, the first real attempt to take a long-term view of the problem.
The radical approach was responsible for focusing public attention on the subject of drugs and raising its profile within the political arena.
Mr Hellawell, who reported directly to the Prime Minister and earned £106,000 a year, won admirers within the drugs prevention industry as he lobbied hard for extra resources for treatment centres and information programmes.
His most important legacy was in helping to drive forward a big increase in drugs education in British schools, aimed at reducing long-term demand for illicit substances.
But the long-term approach did little to endear him to government political strategists, who despaired at the lack of tangible success. Stories began appearing, suggesting that unnamed ministers believed that the drugs tsar should be deposed.
When Mr Blunkett arrived at the Home Office, he switched Mr Hellawell to a two-days-a-week advisory role on international drugs issues. Drugs experts have been at a loss to explain his achievements in this role.
An exasperated Mr Hellawell tendered his resignation at the end of last month, apparently asking for the decision to be kept secret. But yesterday he exacted his revenge on Mr Blunkett in a piece of news management that must have impressed even New Labour's spin doctors.
He revealed his resignation on national radio hours before the Home Secretary was to make his most important pronouncement on drugs policy.
Mr Hellawell said Mr Blunkett's new policy would "virtually be decriminalisation of cannabis and this is giving out the wrong message". He continued: "Cannabis is simply not a sensible substance for people to take. There are strains of cannabis that are extremely powerful, hallucinogenic and very dangerous. It's moving further towards decriminalisation than any other country in the world."
Iain Duncan Smith said Mr Hellawell's departure was "a personal blow for the Prime Minister and punches a huge hole in the Government's drugs policies".
But Danny Kushlick, director of pro-legalisation campaign group Transform, said he was "delighted to see the back of Mr Hellawell" and added: "His statement that the UK has gone further in decriminalising drugs than anywhere else in the world shows just how ignorant he is of what is happening outside his office. In fact, half a dozen European countries have decriminalised possession of all drugs."

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=313980