Virus.Org  IT Security News and Information Portal. We offer the latest IT security news, updates, product reviews, books, and articles for all you IT security professionals out there. Enter and get the best IT security information on the Internet.

 

. Welcome to the Virus.Org Mailing List Archive  
.
.


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]


Re: Government Noses
.

  • To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  • Subject: Re: Government Noses
  • From: "David Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  • Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 11:47:06 +0100
  • In-reply-to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  • Organization: Spidacom Limited
  • References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  • Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  • Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
.
 
On 8 Sep 2003 at 10:26, Ian G Batten wrote:

> There is no regulator and no regulation.

You are right, I was too kind. There is alleged to be a regulator, it 
is alleged that he can now open the post and it is alleged he now does 
some regulation (which seems to consist of believing everything he is 
told and saying how wonderful the chaps are).

I am still not convinced that the regulator exists, other than as a 
rubber stamp created by someone who forges signatures for government. 
This rubber stamp is used by the official forging his reports.

The Home Office did say that they wanted a higher profile for the 
regulator, who they claim does exist. I can't say that I have noticed 
this higher profile. I have just spent a few minutes looking at the 
Home Office RIP page, I can't find a link from that to the regulator. 
That's strange given the "reassurance" they try and give, though much 
of it would be quite laughable if it was not so serious.

> Nothing that Simon says or does can change the fact that any claims of
> `regulation' and `oversight' in his work are total nonsense, because the
> regulator is simply a toothless servant of the people who he is
> supposedly regulating.

That's about the size of it, which is why tinkering at the edges of 
something that is a total failure is not good enough. RIP needs to be 
replaced completely with something designed to regulate investigatory 
powers.

> Perhaps we could ask the Public Accounts
> Committee to see if they can justify paying someone to do nothing except
> write pathetic letters to Simon Davies?

In Scotland we are spending £500million on a bit of road (the cost of 
which doubled without any objections from our "representatives"). At 
least £400million is being spent on a parliament building that has been 
built in the wrong place on the whim of a handful of people in one 
political party in order to wrong-foot another political party. The 
main hospital in Edinburgh has been moved to the wrong place in a PFI 
deal that is not value for money. The schools PFI deal in Edinburgh was 
in danger of collapsing last week with the contractirs talkign of 
pulling out. In the UK we have spent a fortune turning Iraq into a 
haven for terrorists (despite his other many failings the UN building, 
embassies and mosques would most likely not have been blown up if Mr 
Hussein was still in power). Just how much was wasted by MAFF on a 
completely stupid response to the so-called BSE crisis (and remember 
that the Home Office wanted to give these wankers access to my data)?

The invisible man probably does not cost a great deal compared to all 
those scandals.

--
  David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will *always* explain why I revoke a key, unless the UK 
 government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.



 
.
.
 
Copyright (c) Virus.Org 1997-2006.
All Trademarks Acknowledged.
Please view our Terms and Conditions and our Privacy Policy.