Germany hopes to make Holocaust denial a crime across the EU as part of a package of laws it wants to introduce during its presidency of the bloc.

Berlin is also set to outline plans to ban Nazi symbols like the swastika, which, like denying the massacre of the Jews, is already outlawed in Germany.

The good news being that if this is ever implemented, it is sure to whip up some serious hatred and in effect counteract the intended outcome. Not that I believe for a moment that the people at the heart of this conspiracy are governed by good will. But it will obviously be deceitfully propagandized within the EU as a measure to oppose extremism.

Police said the charges against the woman were connected with the arrest last month of a man caught at Heathrow airport in possession of a night vision scope and a poisons handbook.

Police said among the items on the hard drive found in her possession were the Al Qaeda Manual, The Terrorists Handbook, The Mujahideen Poisons Handbook, a manual for a Dragunov sniper rifle, The Firearms and RPG Handbook, a manual for a 9mm pistol and a manual on how to win hand to hand fighting.

Police do say a lot of things, but even if we were to believe them and not surmise that these faux manuals were planted, they still remains just that – faux manuals. The “Mujahideen Poisons Handbook” (available on the net since 1998) for instance has been derided by experts noting that it is filled with a mix of stink bombs and imaginary compounds using imaginary production methods. When a British news paper tried to point this out they were forced to remove the article in question.

Meanwhile, US agents are caught entrapping British citizens on British soil for offenses that aren’t even illegal. The easy extradition that would follow is of course a virtual death sentence given the lawlessness of the US system.

Freedom of expression was essential to democracy, affirmed the minister. “I want people to be able to express themselves in Switzerland, even if their opinion doesn’t appeal to everyone,” he added.

During his trip to Turkey, Blocher had remarked that part of the anti-racism law – adopted in 1994 and including sections aimed at preventing revisionist views about the Holocaust – gave him a “headache”.

The law has led to investigations against two Turks, including a historian, in Switzerland for allegedly denying the 1915 Armenian massacre.

Blocher is right. It is a fairly simple question. Having laws against “Holocaust denial” for instance is not any different, legally speaking, from what Turkey is doing to cover up its own genocide. Both sides would rather not have inconvenient truths uncovered. Plus, these laws — wherever they are present — constitute an enormous blot on the European freedom record.

Beer fingerprints to go UK-wide – Apparently, the fingerprint scheme that was tested is now ready for a nation-wide implementation. Apparently, drinking yobs and anti-social behavior remain the chief sources of crime in the UK today. The test case remains more than a little shaky …

Bradburn could not say if fingerprint security in Yeovil had displaced crime to neighbouring towns, but she noted that domestic violence had risen in Yeovil. She could not give more details until the publication of national crime statistics to coincide with the anniversary of lax pub licensing laws on 24 November.

She was, however, able to say that alcohol-related crime had reduced by 48 per cent Yeovil between February and September 2006.

Oh, and they are also coerced into taking the fingerprint system. New licences stipulate that a landlord who doesn’t install fingerprint security and fails to show a “considerable” reduction in alcohol-related violence, will be put on report by the police and have their licences revoked.

Offenders can be banned from one pub or all of them for a specified time – usually a period of months – by a committee of landlords and police called Pub Watch. Their offences are recorded against their names in the fingerprint system. Bradburn noted the system had a “psychological effect” on offenders.

School expels five-year-old girl – Another yob nipped in the bud, or so the UK system would have us believe. With the care and consideration displayed in this example, it’s no wonder that kids grow up feeling detached from society.

A five-year-old girl has been expelled from a school in Greater Manchester for allegedly attacking staff and a pupil.

Tamara Howard, who only started school in January, is believed to be the youngest child to be permanently excluded from classes in the city.

It does take much effort to consider the possibility that this disruptive behavior is cultivated as a relatively safe way to maintain the stranglehold of the system. Some would argue, as with actual crime, that we have in our power to minimize the problem but that the “getting tough on crime” stance is a miracle drug for politicians and the state itself and hence unlikely to receive genuine attention.

Merseyside Police’s new Anti-Social Behaviour Task Force, already known locally as “the yob squad”, will have an annual budget of £1 million, and a staff of 137 drawn from the fire service as well as the police. Its leader is promising to bring an “Al Capone approach” to anti-social behaviour, using “any lawful means necessary”. Task force leaders are in discussions with the Civil Aviation Authority about the feasibility of sending surveillance drones to hover over problem estates.

Microsoft first asked the U.S. government for help in November, and also attempted to bring the U.S. court system into the battle, however they declined. In all cases, the courts ruled the case was between the EU and Microsoft, and the United States had no jurisdiction.

Kroes said government representatives asked her to be “nicer” before she handed down a decision to fine the Redmond company an additional 280.5 million euros ($357 million) back in July. However, she ignored the requests and the fines went forward.

Both Microsoft and U.S. Embassy representatives have not commented on the reports. But sources within the company say Microsoft itself was not responsible for the government’s actions.

Tony Blair has said it is possible to identify problem children who could grow up to be a potential “menace to society” even before they are born.

Setting out plans for state intervention to prevent babies born into high-risk families becoming problem teenagers of the future, the prime minister said teenage mothers could be forced to accept state help before giving birth, as part of a clampdown on antisocial behaviour.

Mr Blair defended the need for state intervention and said action could even be taken “pre-birth” if necessary as families with drug and alcohol problems were being identified too late.

[T]hey might begin blocking Internet sites, fingerprinting or iris-scanning airline passengers, and training Muslim preachers to fight radicalism. Ministers from Finland, Germany, Portugal, Slovenia and France met in London on [last] Wednesday with the British home secretary, John Reid, to map out new anti-terrorism measures. Afterward, in a press conference, members of the meeting laid out proposals that signaled a shift for Europe, which in the past has been loath to limit individual freedoms or try to impose one set of values on all citizens.

The European Union members are discussing the possibility of blocking Internet sites that incite people to “commit terrorist activities” or provide information about bomb-making. They may be banned, said Franco Frattini, the vice president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU. “There are borders between freedom of expression and incitement of terrorism,” said Frattini, explaining the possibility of blockades.

Plans to shut down Web sites that incite terrorism have already been discussed in the Council of the European Union. How such a plan would be carried out raises a host of questions, including how to define terrorism. “If it is all right to glorify the French resistance and Nelson Mandela, is it all right to glorify the Palestinian cause?” asks Tony Bunyan, the director of Statewatch, which tracks civil liberties in Europe.

It does remind you a bit of the mind-blowing “Holocaust denial” laws that some European nations already have. That is to say, there is a troubling precedence for stifling free speech in Europe. It’s not just about Britain being a bad influence. It is also worth pointing out that hypocritically enough, it is almost always all right to glorify liberation decades after it has succeeded and can no longer be stopped by the powers that be. It is also interesting that both the French resistance and Nelson Mandela, while not publicly opposed, where in fact backstabbed by the United States. That is to say, the U.S. was the best friend, besides Britain, that SA had at the height of Apartheid and the CIA were directly responsible for the incarceration of Mandela. As for France, the U.S. went on to support right-wing collaborators after the war to avoid a possible leftist government, subverting the democratic process in France using funds from the infamous Marshall plan as leverage. The point of course being that we are forgetting a good portion of history if we simply conclude that these parties are, and have always been, accepted and glorified. Not so. That is just a bitter, slightly amnesic hegemon telling us what to think and covering its own dirty business.

A COMPUTER expert who altered indecent images of naked women to make them look like children has been warned that he faces a prison sentence.

Stafford Sven Tudor-Miles scanned photographs of adult porn stars into his computer and used sophisticated digital equipment to reduce the size of their breasts.

The images, which Tudor-Miles also manipulated with graphics software so that the women were partially dressed in school uniforms, appeared to be of girls aged under 18.

The 38-year-old fine art student was charged with possessing indecent pseudo-images of children. His barrister argued that the pictures were of adults and, therefore, no offence had been committed.

At an earlier court hearing, a judge had cast doubt on whether Tudor-Miles was guilty of any offence and used the analogy of a “tarts and vicars” party, suggesting that a photograph of women dressed as schoolgirls at such an event could not be considered child pornography.

Judge Peter Fox released him on conditional bail but said that he should “be prepared, at least, for a prison sentence”.

The court was told that under the Protection of Children Act 1978, as amended by the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, a pseudophotograph of a child is defined as an image, whether made by computer graphics or otherwise, which appears to be that of a child.

And since when did the use of a scanner and Photoshop make one a computer expert? Scary stuff alright. What is next? Round up and stone do death women who don’t dress their age, effectively looking underage?

I always thought that child pornography was about protecting actual children from abuse and being, even if they are willing participants, introduced to the porn industry. This sort of thinking, which is not just a British quirk either, makes rather lengthy extrapolations from the effects of pseudo-images. It’s effectively saying that looking at pseudo-porn, pseudo-images of children will induce abuse of children. What else could it be for? Now, as should be apparent to anyone, if one makes that deduction, not just as a psychological theory but as a legal fact, and decides to act on this, it should also follow that we have now concluded that pornography induces rape, abuse and that violent movies, games, music induce violent behavior. All of the aforementioned cultural triggers are of course debated, but it seems it is only these pseudo-images that are acted upon. That doesn’t seem very logical. But then again, it doesn’t need to be.
Society needs to constantly make up new forms of “crime” or its authority will simply cease to be. For what is the state, in its most simple form, but a basic function to protect its citizens. And these pseudo-images and much of the child porn / paedophilia frenzy allows for just that. A safe cause for everyone to crusade against. Just remember that these are times when liberty is an especially rare commodity.

But the afternoon adventure turned into a frightening ordeal for Sam Cannon, Amy Higgins and Katy Smith after they climbed into the 20ft tree – then found themselves hauled into a police station and locked in cells for up to two hours.

Their shoes were removed and mugshots, DNA samples and mouth swabs were taken.

Apparently the area where these kids live had been marked as “anti-social” (one notch below terrorism and every bit as false) which sort of makes it open season on tree-dwelling kids.