Sim-O

Lenin…

Informal spying on potential employees is understood to happen on a regular basis. I don’t want to name any names, but temp agencies have been known to advise candidates to take care as to what information appears on their Facebook pages, Friends Reunited accounts, blogs or other potential sources of information. Employers scrutinise these sites when reviewing candidates details to see if they are about to hand a contract over to a weirdo or some sort of inflexible, awkward miserabilist. Your blog can get you fired, remember. If you are going to have a Bebo or Hi5 page that is accessible to the public, then the best bet is apparently to project the image of a smiley, outgoing, success-driven, active, sporting, party-hard, go-getting sort of narcissistic dimwit: a miniature celebrity, with friends apparently growing out of every crevice. Employers love that shit.

The use of Facebook and Myspace to get a picture of a potential employee is fair enough, really. If the information is out there in the public domain, then it isn’t a problem. It’s called research, just like someone researches a company before applying for a job or accepting one.

But to be buying information… These companies must’ve know what they were doing was wrong.
Balfour Beatty, Amec, Wimpy, Skanska. They are big companies with big personell and legal departments that exist, in part, to make sure they don’t get caught by the law. Can you seriously believe that they didn’t know what they were doing was wrong?

Remember kids, capitialism, is not your friend.

Wikileaks:

Which? magazine, The Telegraph, Google/UK Press Association and Channel 4 have all pulled articles over Phorm Inc. (BT/Webwise) legal threats.

Which? magazine[1], an independent non-profit magazine published by the Consumers Association in the UK, carried out a survey of their readership on their responses to proposals by Phorm Inc.[2] to work in conjunction with Internet Service Providers in the UK, to use Deep Packet Inspection technology to intercept and profile their customers Internet communications to profile them in connection with behaviourally targeted advertising.
…
When the magazine was published Phorm Inc. immediately applied legal pressure to the Consumers Association. A follow up press release from CA notified publishers of Phorm’s objections to the survey and requested that they not publish articles based on the findings in the survey until matters had been resolved between CA and Phorm. Articles published online by the Press Association, the Daily Telegraph, and a video news report on Channel 4 were immediately taken offline, in response to this legal pressure, and a report in the online version of the Daily Mail was heavily edited to remove references to the Which? survey.

Via

I’ve just been looking at the new Mail Watch site, seeing who the editors are.

It’s been relaunched because, in the words of site owner BigDaddyMerk…

…because it’s what this site needs, it’s what it’s always needed.

I’m looking forward to some excellent posts because of the rich seam of bullshit that is the Daily Mail, but look who Tim and Merk have got to mine it. A team almost, almost as good as the one on The Sun Lies.

The Today programme on Radio 4 had a short discussion on the retirement age today about whether the compulsorary retirement age should be scrapped or raised or left as it is.

At the moment the complusorary retirement age is 65, although the employee can request to stay on, there is no obligation on behalf of the employing company.

I think that this is totally wrong. Why should there be a time, in this case an arbitrary decided age when someone can legally forced out of emploment?

As we get older bits and bobs start failing or but does that mean someone is not fit for employment?
If a person loses a hand or a leg, an employer cannot dismiss that person without first trying to find an alternative position within the company that a one handed/legged person can do. Why then should an employer be able to dismiss a 65 year old person just because they are 65 years old regardless of their ability to do the job?

A responsible employer would probably not do this, but they have the option. And this can’t be right.

As an aside, why are we talking about raising the retirement age at all? Shouldn’t we be trying to enable people to retire earlier? Don’t we spend spend enough of our lives working, without using the extra years we’re living to squeeze more out of us?

Craig Murray: Your Help Needed – Reveal Torture to Stop It

On Tuesday 10 March the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights will discuss whether or not to hear my evidence on the UK government’s policy of using intelligence from torture. They discussed whether to hear my evidence on 3 March but failed to reach a conclusion.

The government is lobbying hard for my exclusion. I need everybody to send an email to jchr@parliament.uk to urge that I should be allowed to give evidence. Just a one-liner would be fine. If you are able to add some comment on the import of my evidence, or indicate that you have heard me speak or read my work, that may help. Please copy your email to craigjmurray@tiscali.co.uk.

Please also pass on this plea to anyone you can and urge them to act. Help from other bloggers in posting this appeal would be much appreciated.

The evidence I am trying to give the parliamentary committee is this:

I wish to offer myself as a witness before the Joint Commission on Human Rights on the subject of the UK government’s policy on intelligence cooperation with torture abroad.

I appeared as a witness in person before both the European Parliament and European Council’s enquiries into extraordinary rendition. My evidence was described by the European Council’s Rapporteur, Senator Dick Marty, as “Compelling and valuable”

Read the rest.

I’m not much of a letter writer, as you might have gathered from reading this blog, but my letter goes as follows:

To: jchr@parliament.uk
cc: craigjmurray@tiscali.co.uk
Subject: The evidence of Craig Murray

Dear Sir,
I write to urge you to hear Craig Murrays’ evidence on the use of intelligence gained through the use of torture.

As Craig was the Ambassador to Uzbekistan from 2002 to 2004, he was regularly seeing information from detainees that was gained through torture.

When Craig raised the issue, that it was illegal and immoral, he was dismissed. Now the government would like Craig not to appear at your committee to try and keep the fact that the UK government was/is complicit in torture.

You, the committee, need to hear Craigs’ evidence to bring to light the appalling things that were done to people in the name of ‘security’ and to hold to account those responsible.

Yours

Sim-O
www.sim-o.me.uk

Update: When you send your email, you may get an out of office reply. Apparently the emails are still being received and circulated.

Bloggerheads – Somebody’s really got it in for Glen Jenvey:

For now it’s important that you take a moment, as I did, to reflect on the following undeniable facts:

– Glen Jenvey denies being ‘abuislam’

– Glen Jenvey denies being ‘Richard Tims’

– Glen Jenvey feels aggrieved/confident enough to classify my assertions to the contrary to be a criminal act, motivated by hatred.

A gentleman does not make complaints to the police lightly, and I take Mr Jenvey to be a gentleman.

Therefore the onus is on me to revisit the evidence and make more of an effort to appreciate claims that much/all of it has been falsified as part of an extremist plot to discredit a successful independent anti-terrorism operative.

As I revisit this evidence, I will be presenting fresh evidence in the form of audio recordings, and seeking testimony from a British diplomat and a Conservative MP.

For the sake of clarity, I ask you to bear with me as I do all of this while maintaining the position that Glen Jenvey is being singled out for special attention by al-Qaeda operatives determined to destroy his reputation

It’s a gripping read, is a reassurance that Bloggerheads hasn’t been infiltrated by Al Quaeda, and I think the tone that Manic has taken reflects the seriousness of the situation.

Harriot Harman received a new position in the government this morning.

After making comments yesterday about taking back Fred ‘The Shred’ Goodwins’ exorbitant pension without giving the sightest hint as to how, Ms Harmann, currently the Leader of the House, will take on the portfolio of Minister with No Mates. A position created especially for her.

This insistance by the new ‘Minnie’ No Mates was greeted with joyful surprise by lawyers, who have a new hope to get through the credit crunch by drawing out a legal wrangle for years, should Ms Harman press ahead.

Several Treasury Officials, who would be tasked with working out how to claw the money back, were so surprised the cry of “WTF?” could be heard ringing all around whitehall.

Magaret Beckett, a veteran MP and current housing minister, took Harriots’ appointment very seriously by isolating Ms Harman by refusing to comment and even suggesting that the government will do nothing.

The shadow chancellor George Osborne commented…

I’m not sure I know… Harriet Harman… at all.

The Prime Minister speaking at Some Forum or Other was momentarily caught off guard. He excelled himself by refusing to address the question, in a way normally only seen in PMQs’, with an answer that we’re not going to unsult you with by printing.

Vince Cable couldn’t help himself and described Ms Harmon as ‘potty’.