Don't mention protection cash

 

 President Hamid Karzai has promised to end the activities of a protection racket that guarantees passage for NATO convoys. His deadline for closing down the activities of the hired guns of warlords and gangsters was December 17th. There are reported to be 40,000 armed men whose allegiance is often to the Taliban. The going rate for safe passage on each lorry is £1,500. The funding is thought to be vital for the Taliban.

The international community supports the idea of getting rid of the guns-for-hire but not by the Dec. 17 deadline. International officials spent several days in intense negotiations with the president, and even U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton weighed in with a phone call asking him to reconsider.

Some security contractors still could be barred from working in Afghanistan by Dec. 17 under Karzai's revised plan, but others will get extensions until at least February.

Karzai has complained for years that many private guards commit human rights abuses, pay protection money to the Taliban and undercut the country's national security forces by offering higher wages and better living conditions. Nations providing aid to Afghanistan, however, question whether Afghan security forces — poorly trained, rife with corruption and stretched thin fighting insurgents — will be able to take on the work of the private guards.

Contractors say they will not be able to find insurers if they are forced to give up private security. Some have already been winding down projects early because they feared they would not be able to protect their workers.

 Depending on when Karzai makes his decision, the 90-day extension could expire as early as February. Then, the Afghan government will assume responsibility for providing security for the projects. Then the sago will hit the fan.

It's yet another under-reported weakness in our fragile supply lines. Our troops could be isolated at a moments' notice. But our Government today remain buoyantly optimistic.

Remembering Tony Bevins

A wonderful event tonight celebrated the memory of independent journalist Tony Bevins. His final illness was a week long. The shock remains. He was great anarchic journalist who challenged the establishment. There were two prizes tonight. The rat up a drainpipe award went to the News of the World.

It was in gratitude to their purity in publishing news in the name of one member of the staff, who was imprisoned, without anyone else on the paper realising that the story was about to be published. 

The Editor explained to the select committee that he had no recollection of the story on his front page about the royal family. As Bob Marshall Andrews said tonight, no member of the select committee asked him how distressed he felt on that Sunday morning when he saw the story for the first time on the front page of the paper that he edited. What a terrible shock it must have been for Mr Coulson. No wonder he looks so worried these days. The prize will cheer him up.

The main prize was won by Clare Sambrook, for her opendemocracy.net reporting on the detention of children in the immigration system. She blogs and writes from her home in Cumbria.

Comments

[DG]

Jonathan Coulton is another great example of a singer/songwriter who's doing very well without needing the traditional distribution model.

His thoughts are here:

http://www.jonathancoulton.com/primer/get/

[Kay Tie]

"ruins the ability of a generation of creative people in Ireland, and elsewhere, to establish a viable living"

They said the same thing about why copyright needed to be extended to nearly a century. Funny, but the ancient Cliff Richard didn't seem reticent to sing songs when he got far less protection.

Oh, must dash. I keep hearing voices in the distance. "Wolf!" they say, "Wolf! Wolf!". Shall I run to help fight off the wolf?

[Kay Tie]

"It's probably premature as well as overly hopeful for me to say this but .. woohoo."

Yay, another win for the rule of law and the right to a fair hearing!

[Kay Tie]

"is there a word for that awful, teeth-edge feeling you get when you find yourself in agreement with a person you'd rather be arguing with?"

Lately me and HuwOS have been feeling this. It's not so bad.

[HuwOS]

Okay so the Guardian article repeated the same nonsense

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1012/upc-technology.html

Isn't it also fascinating that judges as well as MPs to be able to state things as fact without any evidence to support it as in the Guardian article where Justice Charleton was quoted as saying
"This not only undermines their [the creative industries] business but ruins the ability of a generation of creative people in Ireland, and elsewhere, to establish a viable living," said Charleton. "It is destructive of an important native industry."

Colour me frustrated.

[Paul Flynn]

Thanks DG and HuwOS. This is very instructive.

[HuwOS]

Having said that, the industry propaganda still gets spouted even on the BBC

"Last month the High Court in Ireland ruled that laws cutting off internet users who have illegally downloaded content cannot be enforced in the country."

No, the Irish high court ruled that as there were no legislation for a three strikes rule in Ireland that 3rd parties could not force ISPs to adopt a three strikes disconnection policy.
Which is kind of quite a lot different from a court ruling that legislation could not be enforced.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/oct/11/three-strikes-filesharing-ireland

[HuwOS]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11724760

Net providers get Digital Economy Act judicial review

Plans to monitor illegal file-sharers will be scrutinised by a judge

It's probably premature as well as overly hopeful for me to say this but .. woohoo.

[HuwOS]

I have to admit, I am, perhaps unfairly, not that bothered for them.

When they were getting them, both other major parties had already stated they would scrap them if they got into power and most people would not have reckoned that New Labour was all that likely to win re-election.

If it makes them feel any better they can at least swap them for a citizencard for no cost.
Although without government getting behind that as a definitive proof of id, it's acceptance by those requiring ID seems pretty spotty.

[DG]

Oh dear... is there a word for that awful, teeth-edge feeling you get when you find yourself in agreement with a person you'd rather be arguing with?

[HuwOS]

One person in Manchester definitely agrees

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/02/epstein_bye/

[DG]

I think physically destroying it is appropriate in the circumstances. Forensic computing can do wonderful things these days.

This line caught my eye

"not all identity data will be destroyed - some will be kept for the purposes of investigating fraud."

Also, I'm appalled to hear that the 15,000 people who voluntarily paid £30 for a card in Manchester won't get a refund. £30 tends to be a lot of money for people who don't have passports or driving licences to use as ID. Maybe the person who made that decision considers that they could claim it on expenses?

[HuwOS]

For clarity, I was opposed to the ID scheme and am in favour of scrapping it completely.

I am tremendously embarrassed by the way in which I phrased it on the previous comment, although as stated would obviously make me a shoo in for a career in politics, talk about playing to all sides.

[Kay Tie]

"On the music thing."

I actually laughed out loud at that article!

[HuwOS]

Presuming the current government actually do go ahead and pass a bill scrapping the id card system, which I am completely and utterly in favour of, is the plan to destroy the data perhaps a little over the top?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11719764

[HuwOS]

On the music thing.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101109/10571011777/with-the-limewire-mole-wac-d-up-pops-plenty-of-other-options-including-a-new-limewire.shtml

[Kay Tie]

"It may be that I believe that the Times paywall is a disaster that would destroy the paper, such as it is, if Murdoch didn't have such deep pockets"

To be fair to Rupert, he's doing OK selling physical paper. The Times is now making less from subscriptions than from advertising pre-paywall, it seems. But again, Rupert's not bothered by that: he's sticking to a point of principle that it costs money to make a newspaper, and people should pay for it.

I do respect his principle (after all, there's no such thing as a free lunch) but I don't think it will work out. The world doesn't owe corporations a working business model. One day, the landscape changes and businesses have to come to terms with the fact that they can't make as much money as they used to (or even a profit). The music industry doesn't like it one little bit, but reality intrudes in the end.

Online publications like The Register do very well by running lean and keeping their margins up. It's a different kind of business, but I have to say that the journalism on The Register is vastly better than that of The Times. So I am sure The Times could change if it wanted to - it would have to adapt and let go the ways it used to do things.

[HuwOS]

Imagine... excerpts ... from a book giving us a glimpse inside the inner workings of the brain of the decisionator or the decidinator himself
a book that someone who can make marks on paper mean stuff helped with.

I'm all aflutter with excitement.

[HuwOS]

Oh My Gosh

in email today from the Times
"This week, The Times has exclusive extracts from Decision Points, the controversial new memoirs of George W Bush."
Join thetimes.co.uk, and enjoy even more coverage including:
Watch the Editor of The Times talk about his meeting with the former President
Read exclusive online commentary from Ben Macintyre
View a stunning picture gallery and interactive graphics

Join now for just £1 for your first 30 days"

It may be that I believe that the Times paywall is a disaster that would destroy the paper, such as it is, if Murdoch didn't have such deep pockets
and it may be that I haven't seen or heard of a single Times story since the paywall went up.
It may further be that I had no intention of ever signing up to pay for anything from the times website

But now I need to rethink, they have exclusive extracts from the ghostwritten book of the dumbest president of the U.S. in history.

That'll have me parting with my money Rupert, I guess I was wrong all along.