Nigerian Government website rooted by 419ers Chinese?

Interesting, it seems part of the Nigerian government's website infrastructure has some "issues". Currently population.gov.ng has been blocked by Google because this malicious software linked on it that is downloaded via external domains.

UPDATE: Didn;t spot this before, the external domains are in the .cn TLD which is China. "Damn Chinese hackers!" as we say in the trade!

Anyone for spam? I have £3,000,000,000 in a bank but need you to send me some money to get it!
Hat Tip: David Steven

Identity Politics: Twitter Fight!

Yesterday I saw one of those classic moment where lefties scream about discrimination and then ends up with egg on their face. The back and forth was between Benny Austwick (@TheRightStudent), a CF chairman, and Tim Ireland (@Bloggerheads) and it went like this.

TheRightStudent: Just realised something...Mandelson is a 'gaylord' lol
Bloggerheads: @TheRightStudent Just realised something... you're a homophobic tool.
TRS: @bloggerheads Homophobic? Being gay, I didn't think that was possible. I'm Mandelsonphobic though - that's not irrational however.
BH: @TheRightStudent It is, as it happens. Irrationality is like that.
TRS: @bloggerheads I have an irrational fear of myself? Wow, you're better at psychiatry than Draper!
BH: @TheRightStudent You're the only gay person in the vi.. world?
TRS: @bloggerheads Calling Mandelson a Gay Lord is a fact, though. My attempt at light humour fails on lefties.
BH: @TheRightStudent PS - I'll take it back if you like; maybe you just don't give a damn about any of the collateral damage your labels cause.

Now, besides the fact that someone got made to look an idiot when it turned out that Benny and man love are 'bedfellows' as it were, it's the closing comment that struck me as telling.

What we have here is someone telling someone else what language they are allowed to use about themselves, a speech crime if you will, because it may upset or influence others. I wonder though if they'd be equally brave enough to walk into South Central and tell people off for using the word 'nigga' toward each other? Speaking of which, where is the campaign against Ice Cube, Flavor Flav, Snoop, Dre, the Wu Tang Clan, Ice T, Cypress Hill etc etc?

Surely if some Tory student with 309 followers on Twitter is causing "collateral damage" when he says "gaylord" (best not mention the restaurant of that name (whoops I just did)) , then the cream of hip hop and the producers of seminal albums, are verging on pure evil given the global reach their use of racial labelling has. No?

Identity politics and the morally righteous authoritarian suppression of language. Don't you just love it?

The Gift Shop and BBC Newsnight

Last week I did a little bit of filming with David Grossman from BBC Newsnight about the Downing Street Gift Shop and my Freedom of Information Requests. The rain stopped just long enough for us to film it outside.

You can watch the full video here. If anyone has any other questions to ask about the oven gloves on sale or anything else, email me and I'll add it to the list.
Note: Need to lose weight. Look fat.

Renting and claiming?

1: According to the Register of Members Interest, Bob Blizzard, the MP for Wavenly, has a "flat in London, from which rental income is received".

2: According to the censored expenses he also claims £1,278.25 monthly mortgage interest payments under the second home allowance.

Huh?

Supporting ex-servicemen is a fickle business

As I posted earlier on this week, there is a campaign to scrap, or at least reform, Early Day Motions because they waste massive amounts of public money and rarely produce anything meaningful, and sometimes talk about things no one really cares about.

The BBC World at One picked up on this which can be listened to here, where Jon Shepard spoke about the campaign. One of the interesting things in the piece is that quite a few MPs that signed the 10p tax rate EDM attacking the Government actually voted the other way on the issue in Parliament. Who'd have thought they'd be so fickle huh?

Whilst we're on the subject of fickleness by MPs about the causes they choose support through the Early Day Motion system there is a very good example on the issue of pensions to ex-servicemen and women. Over the past three years, the Labour MP Colin Challen has tabled the following motion in each session,

That this House believes that all ex-servicemen and women should be treated equally in the payment of pensions, regardless of when they served in Her Majesty's armed forces.

When he tabled it in the 2006/07 session it received large support with 217 signatures. When it got tabled in the 2007/08 session it only managed 189 signatures, many new but lots of others deserted the cause.

Now, in the 2008/09 session the support for the motion has fallen dramatically down to just 96 signatures. Makes you wonder what they really think about the issue doesn't it? What's more it highlights the sheer impotence of EDMs.

For three sessions this EDM has been tabled, and each year the issue doesn't get addressed, and each year the support for it falls by the wayside. If ever there was a good example and reason for change then this is surely it.

Saddest Tweet of the Day Award: Ed Balls MP

Eddie No Mates?

Bless!
Note: In fairness he got punked by a script but still funny.

As if it's really going to happen...

I know that the thought of nuclear disarmament is all fluffy, but the news that Brown plans to reduce Britain's nuclear stockpile as a means to getting North Korea and Iran to stop their programmes is short-sighted silliness.

I suppose on the plus side, at least Brown is not talking about unilateral action. However, the very notion that if the nuclear powers just reduce their weaponary that other states seeking such weapons will stop trying to get them isn't very realistic.

Such a move is basically predicated entirely on the nuclear powers trusting the rogue states like North Korea and Iran to keep to their words. Do they really think that North Korea, a vicious Stalinist state is going to allow "aggressive" inspections?

Frankly, I'd be very surprised if this will ever be more than a neat little PR story for Obama, Brown et al. After all, the Pentagon will push back hard and drag its feet whether POTUS wants it or not because they're not so trustworthy or stupid.

Bugger the need for proof!

We don't have the evidence but we're going to say you did it anyway?

Even though there may not be sufficient evidence to take him to court, I should like to know if someone was trying to tap me.

Lord West Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Security and Counter-terrorism

Scary logic there.

Quote of the Day

'Freedom is not absolute' - Andy Burnham on BBC Question time

The Little Book of Big Exp£nses

Have just got my hands on an advanced copy of The Little Book Of Big Exp£nses: How to live the MP Lifestyle. Am quite looking forward to reading it and doing some of the quizzes which apparently includes the following,

• Quiz: Match the claim to the Political Party
• The Great Pension Dodge
• Biggest and smallest spenders
• Keeping it in the family, or how to employ your spouse, children and parents
• How much taxpayers’ money does it take to change a lightbulb?
• Absurd concert “riders” (who demanded a luxury 5-bedroom house to be built into the O2 arena?)
• Political piggies from around the world

It's out on July 16th and can be bought on Amazon here.

Proper review to follow.

The must have for graduating students

Hat Tip: imglol

Tory Whips advise MPs to change their passwords

It seems the Tory Whips Office has sent out a round robin email to Tory MPs from their mobile phone provider. The mobile provder Cellhire said,

In light of the latest news stories about mobile phones being hacked in to – we feel that this would be a good time to change the PIN code on your voicemail access for those of you with Cellhire BlackBerries.

Talk about shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.

What's the point of Twitter blocking?

Twitter's security model is utterly bizarre. If you are blocked by someone on Twitter you can still view all their updates via the web on their root Twitter page. The only thing you don't seem to be able to do is read an update on its own unique page when you are logged in. If you are not logged in you can read it (unless they hide all updates all of the time to everyone but friends).

The only functional thing I can see in blocking is that you don't see "replies" that mention you from those you have "blocked", but it doesn't stop those you have "blocked" talking about you publicly or reading you. So, pray tell, what's the point?

Coulson, McBride and general bollocks

This morning I have finally read the article lots of people are frothing about on Twitter in the Guardian and I must say I think some of the commentary said last night is hilarious. Not funny haha as such, rather funny peculiar because it displays a rather weird intellectual vapidity on some and downright hypocrisy on others.

I'll come to the Guardian articles themselves in a moment, but one of the comments made on Twitter last night by the likes of Tim Ireland was that "logic of Tories running hard on Damian McBride is Coulson will have to go the same way". The basic premise here is two fold, firstly that this Guardian story is somehow equivalent to the McBride story, and secondly that because of that it would be hypocritical if the same level of outrage was not displayed as a result.

Now firstly, I should say as an aside, that to see that argument deployed by someone who only the other day screamed about copyright theft in the use of logos by someone on the Right, whilst remaining utterly silent about copyright theft in the use of logos by someone on the Left, I couldn't help but chuckle to myself at what an immensely dumbass thing it was to do, however I digress.

This morning I actually bought the Guardian to see what the fuss was about. Blazoned across the front page was something about Murdoch, but the picture was of Andy Coulson, former editor of the NotW and now communications supremo for the Tories. The juxtaposition of the headline "Tory PR chief under fire over hacking" too the actualities of the stories was brilliantly done I have to admit.

I also have to admit that I found it quaintly amusing to see the sort of editorial tactics that get hammered when they happen in the Sun or Daily Mail being completely ignored when they're done by the Guardian. Then again, consistency in argument is not something one should expect when there is a "OMFG, evil tories!" type thing going on.

So anyway, I read the Guardian article, page 1 and 2, and then the bigger article inside. It was not until I got to paragraph four of the inside article that it said, "David Cameron's chief press adviser, Andy Coulson, is not named in any of the suppressed evidence." As Andrew Neill correctly pointed out, Coulson was either complicit or incompetent, the problem is, no one has any evidence to prove either.

Interestingly, this is the only point at which this story and the McBride one converge, in that Coulson was the boss and his underlings were doing things that he either knew or didn't know. Likewise, McBride was an underling of Brown, and Brown either knew or didn't, but there is that handy thing called plausible denial covering both.

So, screaming for the head of Coulson, or screaming for the head of Brown, becomes one of pure fantasy conjecture driven by nothing more than ones own political bias and opinion. One thing is for sure though, unlike McBride, there remains no evidence like an email written by Coulson saying "good work lads, keep on breaking the law, love it!", or at least such evidence is not yet forthcoming.

Thus, the question raised by the likes of Sunny Hundal of "what will [right wing bloggers] now say about the allegations levelled at Andy Coulson - David Cameron’s director of communications" doesn't need to be answered as such because the premise of the question is wrong. There have been no actual allegations made against Coulson, rather they've been inferred from bugger all evidence and simple correlation of discrete facts.

Does this make the story a "fuss about nothing"? Absolutely not. The fact that journalists for two major newspapers were employing private investigators to go on fishing expeditions to find stories through illegal means (basically phreaking the PSTN) is definitely serious. Who knew what and when is also an important question, both politically and more importantly legally. This makes it very different to the McBride scandal.

McBride was banged to rights, Coulson isn't (yet). Claiming that it would be hypocritical not to be as outraged at Coulson as one might have been at McBride is at best spurious, and at worst plain stupid. Let's not be under any illusions here, the outrage in both cases from opposing side is driven by political bias. The difference is that one has evidence against the person in question and the other doesn't.

Of course, not proven does not mean innocent, but until there is some proof of Coulson's complicity, the best one can really say is that he must have been incompetent if he really didn't know, but that remains speculation too.

This could yet become a "McBride moment" for Cameron, but right now it isn't.

Update: According to Bob Piper this post is a bit of spin and is "on message" and "if you didn't know better, you would suspect the Tory boys are just trotting out a line".

I confess, it's true, I was woken this morning by Andy Coulson personally and told what to write. I didn't read the story and think "pretty incredible, could become serious for Cameron, but currently nothing more than speculation with no actual evidence against Coulson". I'm just doing the bidding of my paymasters. I have no independent thought, I am merely a propaganda tool don't ya know!

Incidentally, should any Jews from the global conspiracy be reading this, I am available for hire for 30 pieces of silver. I'm also available to push the neocon agenda at the right price. *nudge* *nudge*

Has Brown considered using technicalities to delay the election?

There is an interesting article on Political betting noting that Brown could delay the election for another three years quite legally if he just let Parliament expire, it notes,

The only statutory requirement to move writs for a general election is under the Meeting of Parliament Act 1694, which allows no less than three years between the dissolution and the writs being issued. In other words, technically, the election doesn’t have to be held until June 2013.

Interestingly, I heard through a source back in April that backbenchers had been discussing these mechanisms as a way to delay an election by an extra few months shoudl the economy not be back on its feet by June 2010.

Careful what you wish for?

Is someone digging for dirt?

I don't deny I'm cynical, but some may remember the other week I wondered what Tom Watson was up to when he kept on asking about Demos. Well he's still at it now asking whether they were present at meetings etc.

The cynic in me wonders whether this might just be linked to James Purnell taking on a role with them. Watson is a Brownite loyalist. Purnell did Brown in the back and is a potential leadership challenger. No love lost there methinks.

So, and I'm just throwing these questions out there. Is Watson digging for dirt? Could it be that, in the wake of the McBride scandal, he resigned from Government so as to create distant between political plays and the Government machine?

It's all very intriguing.

Google Chrome "OS" - Just Linux with another UI

There is quite bit of excitement about the official announcement from Google that it is releasing a free operating system. It's not exactly new news though and has been in the offing for ages. Likewise, it's not a new operating system either, as the press release says,

Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel

So what we're really talking about is a Linux distribution with a new UI X11 interface, like Gnome, KDE and XFCE. I reckon it will be called ChromE to denote it as an environment.

What's important here is that the question, "will Google Chrome OS beat Windows?" should really be, "will Linux with yet another UI beat Windows?". The answer to other questions like "can it run Word?" or "can it run photoshop?" are already answerable as "yes".

The only way this move by Google will push Linux even harder into the home market as an alternative is going to be if they do an OEM deal with the likes of Dell and HP to ship their distribution pre-installed as a purely Internet type OS - like Netbooks.

Importantly though, I think there will be a lot of very disappointed Windows users out there that will download this new Linux distro, install it, and then suddenly get upset when some things won't work - like the very latest bleeding edge peripherals, Nokia phones and or new DirectX games.

That's my two penneth anyway.

Bert is Evil!

Was quite amused to see this post on Comment Central. The image has changed now, but this is what it looked like before.

See Bert? He's evil he is! Interweb folklore that is.

Brown's Britain

Source: Office of National Statistics
Hat Tip: Tim Montgomerie

Ed Balls: Man of the People?

Bless, he has to start work at 9am. It's a hard life ain't it?

Talk about totally out of touch with what us ordinary people do every day.

Update: There have been comments that Ed Balls' complaint is legitimate. No its not. There is a phrase in recruitment about jobs that suit working parents. It's called a "Golden Hours" job where work is 9am - 3pm.

Kids start lessons at 9am, that means they need to be at school before that. Ordinary people cope with that, and they don't have ministerial cars.