GRIMLY FIENDISH

Well, it's clearly not true.. If you look at the actions of many of our Politicians and how they've favoured the banks and the corporations, and how they look the other way when the banks and Corporations commit fraud and other crimes... TBH, I think the Greek population in general have been pretty savvy, they certainly seem to know who the enemy is, the IMF, the ECB, the French and German banks, and their own crooked politicians...

That doesn't make any sense, you can't reject the bail-out conditions and stay in the Euro.. The Euro is what the Greek's problem is.... As in, they should never have been in it to begin with....

Not sure I agree. The issues didn't seem to prove too complicated for people when there was a similar referendum done concerning bank bail-outs in Iceland... I think it's simple tbh - Do you want the EU Bail-out fund, or, Do you want Greece to default, and bring in a devalued Drachma...? Either way involves pain, but the latter option actually means you keep your sovereignty and you're not controlled by the IMF...

Indeed... Bringing us again to the article you posted yesterday about the Corporation of London.... -_-

True, but Batman is a fictional character, ergo, anyone could potentially play him... ;) Miranda Richardson would've nailed it totally, I think... Heck, they could've just waited 10 years or so and given the job to Kate Winslett... Or maybe 15 years and given it to Andrea Reisborough, who frankly did a great job of playing Young Maggie in "Long Walk From Finchley"...

So, apparently...... Tax havens benefit the economy, say Tory MP A conservative MP has spoken out in defence of tax havens and against what he called "a one-sided debate that demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of their role in the global financial market". http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/persona...ay-Tory-MP.html Westminster MP Mark Field sought to dismantle the arguments put forward by the likes of Nicholas Shaxson, author of Treasure Islands, an exposé of the secret world of offshore tax havens, and NGOs such as Action Aid, who often present the world's problems as solvable through the retrieval of money supposedly siphoned offshore. In an attempt to balance the "one-sided" debate on international finance centres (IFCs), Mr Field argued that UK corporate tax avoidance via international finance centres was, in reality, significantly lower than the £25 billion claimed by the TUC, and advised the UK government to think twice before imposing more regulation on these jurisdictions. The UK, in fact, had much to thank offshore finance jurisdictions for, particularly those with which it has a constitutional relation through its Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories, said Mr Field at the Sovereign Group seminar at the Caledonian Club last week. In a reference to the UK's participation in the current G20 summit, Mr Field said: "The UK has a constitutional relationship with half of the top 30 offshore finance centres. "Therefore it is essential that the UK plays an active role to ensure that any international regulation is appropriate and does not place unnecessary burdens on the UK financial sector, or on the wider UK economy which is a major recipient of investment capital raised through small IFCs. "Together the Crown Dependencies make a significant contribution to the liquidity of the UK market. Together they provided net financing to the UK banks of $332.5bn in the second quarter of calendar year 2009. "These funds are largely accounted for by the 'up streaming' to the UK head office of deposits collected by UK banks including Lloyds Banking Group and Royal Bank of Scotland, as well as Barclays, HSBC, Santander and a number of building societies." Treasure Islands author Nicholas Shaxson, who Mr Field believes overlooks or conveniently ignores these benefits in order to present offshore centres as "shady totalitarian islands responsible for most of the world's current ills", said: "As I explain clearly in Treasure Islands, tax havens hoover up business from around the world and feed it into the City of London. This is a major reason why the City of London has become so powerful, so separate from the real economy, and so hard to reform. It is nothing to boast about." In a bid to dismiss the age-old belief that tax havens attract investors purely because of their tax regimes, Mr Field argued that it is a combination of their political stability, familiar legal systems, quality of service, lack of foreign exchange controls, and tax and legal neutrality that make them ideal locations to deposit money. The current financial crisis, he continued, had more to do with poor regulation and mistakes made onshore rather than offshore, and if the EU pressed ahead with its intention to harmonise tax systems across international borders "it could potentially represent the end for healthy tax competition and possibly represent a further strike upon the Zero-10 regimes so ably defended earlier this year by Jersey and the Isle of Man." Tax harmonisation and cooperation, added Mr Field, was simply Brussels-speak for exporting high tax models on continental Europe to low tax jurisdictions. Nicholas Shaxson responded to this by saying: "There is a permanent regulatory ‘race to the bottom’ between jurisdictions as each seeks to attract flighty global capital. "Tax havens with their ‘fast and flexible’ lawmaking lead this race. Financiers wield the threat: don’t tax or regulate us too much or we’ll run offshore. So the race goes on. You will also find that a lot of the exotic instruments behind the subprime mess were located or listed offshore. Tax havens are never the only cause, but they were a major factor. "As for competition between countries, it bears absolutely no economic relation with healthy competition between firms in a market. "If a company fails, it is sad, but this ‘creative destruction’ is a source of capitalism’s dynamism. it is healthy. But what happens if a country cannot compete? A failed state? Tax competition is anti-democratic and unremittingly dangerous." Concluding the speech with an effort to dismiss perhaps the most damaging accusation levelled at international financial centres, that they support capital flight out of developing countries, Mr Field said: "Organisations such as the Commonwealth Secretariat, which represents many developing countries among its 54 members, have sought to recognise the value of developing international financial centres as a route to economic development and prosperity." Mr Shaxson replied: "We should be concerned for local tax haven populations. But weigh up the interests of 60,000 people in Cayman against the interests of 600 million Latin Americans and a billion Africans, and it is clear what matters. And those who do best out of financial business in tax havens like Cayman are typically white foreigners, not locals." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yeah, right, whatever, well, I suppose someone had to come along and try to justify the unjustifiable.... Oh, and by the way despite all this, Mr Fields enjoys FREE HOLIDAYS to Dubai.. And his missus is on the Board of Directors at HSBC... TBH, I think the title of this article should really be "Tory W/anker and Apologist for the 1% Gets totally OWNED By Clever Author Who Actually Has a Clue.."

Interesting video this... "191 Days Without Charge" http://vimeo.com/25113282

UK court rejects Assange extradition appeal http://rt.com/news/assange-british-higher-court-361/ Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, will be extradited from the UK to Sweden to face questioning over rape allegations. Britain's High Court has decided that there is enough evidence against the Australian citizen to grant the request. Judges John Thomas and Duncan Ouseley ruled Wednesday that Julian Assange, who attended the court to hear the verdict, should be extradited to Sweden to be questioned over allegations of sexual molestation and rape in Stockholm last year. “I have not been charged with any crime in any country. Despite this, the European Arrest Warrant is so restrictive that it prevents UK courts from considering the facts of a case, as judges have made clear here today. We will be considering our step in the days ahead. The full judgment will be available on SwedenversusAssange.com No doubt there will be many attempts to try to spin these proceedings as occurred today, but they are really technical. Please go to SwedenversusAssange.com if you want to know what is really going on in this case,” Assange stated. On saying this, the WikiLeaks founder declined to answer questions and immediately made it to a car awaiting him, accompanied by a handler. Assange, 40, has been consistently denying all allegations, insisting that the case has been inspired by political motivations. WikiLeaks’ Australian founder has been under virtual house arrest in the UK for the last 11 months . Assange’s lawyers have 14 days to prepare a case to convince the High Court to allow for a third and final appeal to the Supreme Court. Appealing to the Supreme Court in Britain is only allowed if the High Court rules a case creates a major precedent and the results would apply to a wider public. If it does go to the Supreme Court, it is likely that the entire basis of the European arrest warrant, under which people can be extradited to other EU countries to face questions with very little evidence, will be put under scrutiny. Many in the UK would welcome that. But civil right groups fear that extraditing Julian Assange to Sweden could result in his landing in an American court to face charges relating to WikiLeaks’ publication of thousands of classified US government documents. This case is politically-motivated,” civil rights activist Jim Curran told RT. “If Assange is extradited to Sweden, the major concern among civil lawyers and civil rights groups that this will create an implication for his further extradition to the US. There is great concern in the UK about extradition to the US, as many people fear they cannot get a fair hearing in America.” -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So, on the back of Wikileaks perhaps closing down due to lack of access to funds, we have this ruling... Yep, the 1% and the US Political establishment basically joining forces to take out one of the leading voices who were calling them to account for their crimes against humanity.. I've never really bought the charges against him. They seem to be considerably shakier than the rape case against Dominic Strauss Khan (and I would say there was probably more evidence there than there is against Assange..), and the case against DSK was dropped. Assange had already been in a Swedish court, but they basically couldn't bring any charges against him because of lack of evidence, and then all of a sudden, the charges get resurrected by some politician AFTER the first lot of damaging revelations which embarrassed Obama, Hillary and Co... Doesn't take a genius or a conspiracy theorist to see something's really not right here... Let's make no mistake about this, I think that this is basically an excuse to get him to a stopping-post, and then, before you know it, he'll be off to the US to a Federal Super-Max, or to Guantanamo Bay.

Model fired for Gaddafi sympathies https://rt.com/news/model-fired-gaddafi-sympathies-377/ Considering the Gaddafi family to be “normal people” can cost you a job, as a German-based model discovered after an interview about her relationship with Muammar Gaddafi's son Mutassim. ­ US-born Italian model Vanessa Hessler, 23, dated Mutassim Gaddafi for four years. The interview with Hessler was released after her former lover was captured and killed alongside his father Muammar in October. “I didn't have any contact with him since the uprising broke out, but our relationship was one of passion. The Gaddafi family is not as they are being depicted. They are normal people,” Hessler was quoted in Italian magazine Diva e Donna. “We, France and the United Kingdom, financed the rebels, but people don't know what they are doing,” she added. These comments cost Hessler her long-term contract with Telefónica Germany. They chose to terminate their partnership with the blonde model for “failing to distance herself from her comments on the conflict in Libya.” This is despite Hessler being a household figure in Germany, with giant Telefónica posters featuring the model prominent in many German cities. During an attempt to hold talks with the company, Hessler chose to stand by her comments. The company vowed to remove her face from all their PR-material within 24 hours. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ WARNING TO ALL MODELS - Thinking for yourself, and actually having an opinion on current affairs can cost you your job... Especially when your contract's with one of the companies who are no doubt on their way to exploit the new "Free Libya"... Yes, we just want our models to be pretty and pout for the camera, heaven forbid they actually might have a BRAIN.... I actually have respect for her because she stood by her opinions and didn't try any kind of mealy-mouthed back-peddling.... Good for her... Obviously a young woman of strong character, ethics and principles.... Which means she has shit-all chance of ever making a career for herself in politics...

But what if the people making these complex decisions are not doing it in the best interests of the people of that sovereign nation, but in the interests of a tiny cabal of global banking and corporate elites...? Which is surely the whole problem with this Financial Crisis... That "representative governments" have been revealed to be resolutely NOT acting in the interests of their respective peoples for the past several decades.... This is what "Occupy.." and GIABO (the Global Insurrections Against Banker Occupation) is all about.... I'm afraid I have to disagree.. I'm 100% behind the Greek Referendum.. Now, perhaps the voice of the Greek nation can be heard... Because it certainly wasn't heard when Greek politicians took the decision upon themselves to enter into the Euro (dishonestly by the way, deliberately down-playing the extent of their debt-to-GDP ratio) and to basically f**k-up the Greek people with all this toxic crap.... Oh, but of course it suited German and French banks to loan Greece billions so they would import French and German goods and help keep their economies afloat...

And why should I be happy about yet another f***ing American playing a famous BRITISH historical figure.... ? <_< Seriously, like we dont have talented actresses of our own for this part...??

Poison, gunshot or blow to the head...? :lol:

Greek bailout referendum to launch euro ‘endgame’ http://rt.com/news/greek-bailout-referendum-greece-339/ Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou has stunned the EU by calling a national referendum on the latest bailout deal to the economy. This might be the only way for the Greek government to restore its legitimacy, argues economist James Meadway. “Possibly, it is by forcing the issue back on to the people that is the only route for them to deal with the crisis, restore their legitimacy and rehabilitate the deeply unpopular government,” says James Meadway, senior economist at the New Economics Foundation. Papandreou will have to face other ordeals before the proposed referendum can take place, continues Meadway. First, the government will have to withstand a confidence vote on Friday. Moreover, the New Democracy Party, which is the principal opposition party in Greece, is demanding a new election rather than a bailout referendum The recent violent protests in Greece suggest the bailout referendum might result in a ‘no’ vote, but this could play into the hands of Athens, says Meadway. The country would be in a position to default on its debt and rebuild its economy, which has been shattered by the euro burden. Greece and the EU are facing the “endgame”, believes the economist. Time has come for concrete measures. “Since the first bailout of Greece in March 2010, we have always been reaching a critical stage while the final reckoning has been deferred and deferred. The collective leadership of the EU, European Central Bank and International Monetary Fund has managed to push off any kind of decisive change of the situation which could resolve the crisis,” he told RT. Greece’s possible default, although urgently needed within the country, poses a danger to the fundamentals of the eurozone, underlines Marco Pietropoli, a financial adviser at RM Wealth Management. “Most of the Greek debt is owned by other EU sovereigns as well as by the banks and pension funds,” says Pietropoli. “The Greek default might make the banking system much less stable. The worry here is the snowball effect – whether this will lead to a number of other sovereign defaults and the credit crunch for the banks to plunge into.” The crisis has shown that the eurozone as such should be restructured. Countries which are not truly aligned should leave, or Europe should integrate further both politically and fiscally, remarks Pietropoli. Another solution to the eurozone crisis would be the Europeans printing more money to monetize the debt, but that would send inflation spiraling. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well, that was a surprise... Basically it sounds like Papandreou is fighting for his political life... Greeks hate him. That much is clear from the demos and riots on the streets.. If a referendum comes (and there's no cast-iron guarantee of that, I don't doubt the Banksters will have a few tricks up their sleeves to try and nobble this) and if the Greek people vote against this deal, then it surely spells potential disaster for the Eurozone.... 2012 is sure looking to be interesting either way.... James Meadway in the interview says something interesting however, the way the markets reacted yesterday to a perfectly legitimate democratic proposal (I mean heaven forbid the Greek people have a say in their own destiny... -_- ) is indeed very telling... Capitalism is clearly scared/hostile to true Democracy.... All the more reason to have more true Democracy, IMO....

I know, incredible innit...? Just shows how completely f**ked up the Western media is..... And people wonder why I watch Russia Today and Al Jazeera.... LOL :rolleyes:

I live in London, EVERYTHING this article says is true..... A bit of good news though.... http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/blog/2011/nov...ction?fb=native As of 4.30pm, the City of London and St Pauls are suspending their legal action... For how long exactly, who knows...?

He could just choose to ignore it.. Like he's just choosing to ignore all the Corporate malfeasance and fraud, thieving and money laundering for drugs cartels that's going on in the Banking sector.... -_-

US cuts Unesco funding over Palestinian support Obama administration says it has no choice but to slash UN body's total income by 20 per cent http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/mi...rt-6255541.html The Obama administration has cut off funding for Unesco after it awarded Palestine full membership – a result hailed by Palestinians as a crucial step in its bid for full UN membership. There were loud cheers as the results of the vote were announced: 107 in favour, 14 against and 52 abstentions. The vote would, Palestinian Foreign Minister, Riyad al-Maliki, told delegates in Paris after the result, "erase a tiny part of the injustice done to the Palestinian people". One of the first concrete results of Palestine's membership could be that the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem is listed as a world heritage site. But it was a risky gambit, the result of which is that the UN's educational, scientific and cultural body will lose at least 22 per cent – or $60m – of its funding from the United States, which is obliged by a two decades-old law to withdraw support from any body that grants the Palestine Liberation Organisation the standing of a state. US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters that the United States had no choice but to halt funding, and said the vote was "regrettable, premature and undermines our shared goal of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East." The vote would, said David Killion, US ambassador to Unesco, "complicate" Washington's efforts to support the body, but insisted that the US remained "deeply committed" to the institution and would seek alternative ways to fund it. Israel, which voted against the motion, accused the Palestinians of taking a counterproductive step that will change nothing on the ground, while moving a peace agreement further out of reach. "Unesco deals in science, not science fiction," said Nimrod Barkan, Israel's ambassador to Unesco. "They forced on Unesco a political subject out of its competence. They have forced a drastic cut in contributions to the organisation." His government said it was reconsidering its co-operation with Unesco. Before the vote, Israel's outspoken Foreign Minister, Avigdor Lieberman, said that if the measure passed, Israel should cut off ties with the Palestinian Authority. It was not clear whether he was voicing government policy. But the Palestinians viewed the move as a measure of international support and a moral victory for their campaign to internationalise the conflict amid a prevailing domestic view that peace negotiations have achieved little or nothing for them in nearly 20 years of talks. Israel and the Americans have insisted that the only way to achieve an independent state is through face-to-face negotiations with Israel, and they have both lobbied vigorously against a parallel Palestinian effort to seek full membership of the UN, a bid that is almost certainly doomed in light of Washington's insistence that it will veto the move. But yesterday's vote faced no such obstacles. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ How typical... US sides with the Zionists yet again. Predictable really.. So, now Obama does the cowardly thing, refuses to repeal an act from the Bush Sr days which should never have been on the US Statute books to begin with, and uses it as a lame justification.. They use it as an excuse, but even if such a law didn't exist, this administration would likely invent it, because it's clear where the US political establishment stands - with the Zionists every step of the way. Britain abstained from the vote.. Which I guess is a bit better than attempting to block it, but still a bit of a cop-out, but I suppose UK cant be seen to be actually standing up to U$rael and defying them.... Shame on Australia however.... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Greens slam Australia's Palestine stance http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-...x-1226182638808 THE Australian Greens have slammed the Federal Government for trying to block Palestine's entry to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). Greens Leader Bob Brown now wants Australia to financially support the organisation after the US declared it would stop contributions to UNESCO after Palestine was admitted as a full member in Paris yesterday. "This is very poor form of the Australian Government," Senator Brown said today. Rather than voting against the motion, Australia should have at least followed the lead of the UK and New Zealand in abstaining from the vote, he said. "It's counter-intuitive and it's time Australia took a more independent role," Senator Brown said. "We don't have to be tied to what the US does in matters like this." The Greens were on the side of Palestine being given its independence alongside "a safe and secure" Israel. The US responded to Palestine's entry to UNESCO by stopping financial contributions. It provides about 22 per cent of UNESCO's annual budget. The US, Israel's top ally, in the 1990s banned the financing of any UN organisation that accepted Palestine as a full member. Senator Brown says Australia should step in. "I would hope that Australia would consider helping make up for it if the US does the wrong thing and withdraws some 25 per cent of UNESCO's funding because of this vote," he said. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Very, very disappointing....I kind of expected better from the Aussies than to just suck up to the Yanks... -_-

Agreed... Which is probably the reason why that no other European country is even contemplating such a thing... And not even the US either... So, what does that say....? :rolleyes:

Well, I'm not in favour of a DNA database either, for pretty much the same reasons as I'm against this... It's a violation of privacy... And, DNA evidence is not the "magic bullet" that is claimed.... Mainly due to the whole "secondary DNA transfer" thing... If I was going kill someone, I'd make sure I planted someone else's DNA at the scene of the crime...

This part in particular... "If he is given these powers purely because he owns land in Cornwall it is pretty stupid. What about the other landowners who must also be affected by changes to legislation?" Prince Charles is somehow "worthy" of some special veto....?? Errr, why....?

Oh, Chris would probably love it.... He's likely a fan of "Big Brother"... :rolleyes:

Prince Charles has been offered a veto over 12 government bills since 2005 Ministers sought prince's consent under secretive constitutional loophole on bills covering issues from gambling to the Olympics http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oct/30/p...P=FBCNETTXT9038 Ministers have been forced to seek permission from Prince Charles to pass at least a dozen government bills, according to a Guardian investigation into a secretive constitutional loophole that gives him the right to veto legislation that might affect his private interests. Since 2005, ministers from six departments have sought the Prince of Wales' consent to draft bills on everything from road safety to gambling and the London Olympics, in an arrangement described by constitutional lawyers as a royal "nuclear deterrent" over public policy. Unlike royal assent to bills, which is exercised by the Queen as a matter of constitutional law, the prince's power applies when a new bill might affect his own interests, in particular the Duchy of Cornwall, a private £700m property empire that last year provided him with an £18m income. Neither the government nor Clarence House will reveal what, if any, alterations to legislation Charles has requested, or exactly why he was asked to grant consent to such a wide range of laws. Correspondence seen by the Guardian reveals that one minister wrote to the prince's office requesting his consent to a new bill about planning reform because it was "capable of applying to ... [the] Prince of Wales' private interests". In the last two parliamentary sessions Charles has been asked to consent to draft bills on wreck removals and co-operative societies, a freedom of information request to the House of Commons has revealed. Between 2007-09 he was consulted on bills relating to coroners, economic development and construction, marine and coastal access, housing and regeneration, energy and planning. MPs and peers called for the immediate publication of details about the application of the prince's powers which have fuelled concern over his alleged meddling in British politics. "If princes and paupers are to live as equals in a modern Britain, anyone who enjoys exceptional influence or veto should exercise it with complete transparency," said Andrew George, Liberal Democrat MP for St Ives in Cornwall. "The duchy asserts that it is merely a private estate. Most people will be astonished to learn that it appears to have effective powers of veto over the government." "We should know why he is being asked and the government should publish the answers," said Lord Berkeley, who was last month told to seek Charles' consent on a marine navigation bill. "If he is given these powers purely because he owns land in Cornwall it is pretty stupid. What about the other landowners who must also be affected by changes to legislation?" Revelations about Charles' power of consent come amid continued concern that the heir to the throne may be overstepping his constitutional role by lobbying ministers directly and through his charities on pet concerns such as traditional architecture and the environment. A spokesman for the Prince of Wales would not comment on whether the prince has ever withheld consent or demanded changes to legislation under the consent system. "Communications between the prince or his household and the government are confidential under a long-standing convention that protects the heir to the throne's right to be instructed in the business of government in preparation for his future role as monarch," he said. Daniel Greenberg, a former parliamentary counsel and now parliamentary lawyer at Berwin Leighton Paisner, said: "It is something of a nuclear-button option that everybody knows he is not likely to push. But like the nuclear deterrent, the fact that it is there, influences negotiations." Graham Smith, director of Republic, the campaign for an elected head of state, said it was "an affront to democratic values" that citizens had no right to know whether Charles was insisting on changes to bills. "We know Charles has been lobbying ministers, but this is evidence he has the power to instruct them to alter their plans and that gives him leverage," he said. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So, no power, no influence, purely a "constitutional monarchy", the Queen is just a rubber stamp....blah, blah, blah... The absolute crap that the "pro-Monarchy" propagandists have been telling us for years is finally shattered.... Prince Charles has had the power to VETO 12 Government bills.... Since when is a VETO not a political power...?? In fact, isn't a VETO, the ultimate political power....?? So, basically, some rich, unelected toff, completely and totally detached from reality has had executive power.... Someone should tell David Cameron and George Osborne......

You keep saying this shite Chris, and I keep replying STFU you prat, that's hardly the point.... :rolleyes:

I wonder if this is the same piece of kit that the San Francisco transit police used to jam mobile phone signals to stop protesters.... http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,23910...bid=1vUGzF4bTK8

Met police using surveillance system to monitor mobile phones http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oct/30/m...P=FBCNETTXT9038 Civil liberties group raises concerns over Met police purchase of technology to track public handsets over a targeted area Britain's largest police force is operating covert surveillance technology that can masquerade as a mobile phone network, transmitting a signal that allows authorities to shut off phones remotely, intercept communications and gather data about thousands of users in a targeted area. The surveillance system has been procured by the Metropolitan police from Leeds-based company Datong plc, which counts the US Secret Service, the Ministry of Defence and regimes in the Middle East among its customers. Strictly classified under government protocol as "Listed X", it can emit a signal over an area of up to an estimated 10 sq km, forcing hundreds of mobile phones per minute to release their unique IMSI and IMEI identity codes, which can be used to track a person's movements in real time. The disclosure has caused concern among lawyers and privacy groups that large numbers of innocent people could be unwittingly implicated in covert intelligence gathering. The Met has refused to confirm whether the system is used in public order situations, such as during large protests or demonstrations. Nick Pickles, director of privacy and civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch, warned the technology could give police the ability to conduct "blanket and indiscriminate" monitoring: "It raises a number of serious civil liberties concerns and clarification is urgently needed on when and where this technology has been deployed, and what data has been gathered," he said. "Such invasive surveillance must be tightly regulated, authorised at the highest level and only used in the most serious of investigations. It should be absolutely clear that only data directly relating to targets of investigations is monitored or stored," he said. Datong's website says its products are designed to provide law enforcement, military, security agencies and special forces with the means to "gather early intelligence in order to identify and anticipate threat and illegal activity before it can be deployed". The company's systems, showcased at the DSEi arms fair in east London last month, allow authorities to intercept SMS messages and phone calls by secretly duping mobile phones within range into operating on a false network, where they can be subjected to "intelligent denial of service". This function is designed to cut off a phone used as a trigger for an explosive device. A transceiver around the size of a suitcase can be placed in a vehicle or at another static location and operated remotely by officers wirelessly. Datong also offers clandestine portable transceivers with "covered antennae options available". Datong sells its products to nearly 40 countries around the world, including in Eastern Europe, South America, the Middle East and Asia Pacific. In 2009 it was refused an export licence to ship technology worth £0.8m to an unnamed Asia Pacific country, after the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills judged it could be used to commit human rights abuses. A document seen by the Guardian shows the Metropolitan police paid £143,455 to Datong for "ICT hardware" in 2008/09. In 2010 the 37-year-old company, which has been publicly listed since October 2005, reported its pro forma revenue in the UK was £3.9m, and noted that "a good position is being established with new law enforcement customer groups". In February 2011 it was paid £8,373 by Hertfordshire Constabulary according to a transaction report released under freedom of information. Between 2004 and 2009 Datong won over $1.6 (£1.03m) in contracts with US government agencies, including the Secret Service, Special Operations Command and the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In February 2010 the company won a £750,000 order to supply tracking and location technology to the US defence sector. Official records also show Datong entered into contracts worth more than £500,000 with the Ministry of Defence in 2009. All covert surveillance is currently regulated under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (Ripa), which states that to intercept communications a warrant must be personally authorised by the home secretary and be both necessary and proportionate. The terms of Ripa allow phone calls and SMS messages to be intercepted in the interests of national security, to prevent and detect serious crime, or to safeguard the UK's economic wellbeing. Latest figures produced by the government-appointed interception of communications commissioner, Sir Paul Kennedy, show there were 1,682 interception warrants approved by the home secretary in 2010. Public authorities can request other communications data – such as the date, time and location a phone call was made – without the authority of the home secretary. In 2010, 552,550 such requests were made, averaging around 1,500 per day. Barrister Jonathan Lennon, who specialises in cases involving covert intelligence and Ripa, said the Met's use of the Datong surveillance system raised significant legislative questions about proportionality and intrusion into privacy. "How can a device which invades any number of people's privacy be proportionate?" he said. "There needs to be clarification on whether interception of multiple people's communications – when you can't even necessarily identify who the people are – is complaint with the act. It may be another case of the technology racing ahead of the legislation. Because if this technology now allows multiple tracking and intercept to take place at the same time, I would have thought that was not what parliament had in mind when it drafted Ripa." Former detective superintendent Bob Helm, who had the authority to sign off Ripa requests for covert surveillance during 31 years of service with Lancashire Constabulary, said: "It's all very well placed in terms of legislation … when you can and can't do it. It's got to be legal and obviously proportionate and justified. If you can't do that, and the collateral implications far outweigh the evidence you're going to get, well then you just don't contemplate it." In May the Guardian revealed the Met had purchased software used to map suspects' digital movements using data gathered from social networking sites, satnav equipment, mobile phones, financial transactions and IP network logs. The force said the software was being tested using "dummy data" to explore how it could be used to examine "police vehicle movements, crime patterns and telephone investigations." The Met would not comment on its use of Datong technology or give details of where or when it had been used. A spokesman said: "The MPS [Metropolitan police service] may employ surveillance technology as part of our continuing efforts to ensure the safety of Londoners and detect criminality. It can be a vital and highly effective investigative tool. "Although we do not discuss specific technology or tactics, we can re-assure those who live and work in London that any activity we undertake is in compliance with legislation and codes of practice." A spokesman for the Home Office said covert surveillance was kept under "constant review" by the chief surveillance commissioner, Sir Christopher Rose, who monitors the conduct of authorities and ensures they are complying with the appropriate legislation. He added: "Law enforcement agencies are required to act in accordance with the law and with the appropriate levels of authorisation for their activity." Datong declined to comment. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember the days when the authorities had to actually get a court order to go around doing surveillance on your phone...? I kind of wonder what on earth we bothered fighting the Cold War for if all we're going to do in this so-called "liberal democracy" is basically something which the KGB and Stasi would've absolutely creamed their kecks over to get their greasy paws on.... Look at the range of this thing TEN KILOMETERS.... That is a very large area of London, pretty much the whole of Central London, possibly going all the way up to Highgate... You cant potentially catch about two million peoples' phones, probably even more than that.. Over two million+ people being covertly spied on..... Something like this is surely the stuff of Orwellian nightmares.... I'd be very curious to know which "middle east regimes" are clients of this lot.... Surely not the ones that we've just been criticising for being all "oppressive and undemocratic"?? Perish the thought.... :rolleyes: