An issue that refuses to go away is whether some academic research now needs a license from the local police. Regular readers may remember the case of Hicham Yezza and Rizwaan Sabir, which we reported on in May. This kicked off when Mr Sabir, a postgraduate student at Nottingham University, asked Mr Yezza to help him out by …
Would make for good research
Just have some professor (or several together) assign all types of possible dodgy books to stodents with the intructions on what police stations to go to to ask for opinnions if they are legal to own and then make a report.
Say you have 100 books, spread out on 100 students, each book given to 3 students, and every student thus getting 3 differtent books over the course to ask the police about.
Then write a research paper on the responses..
I had the misfortune to do a chemistry degree, read Horowitz and Hill, and watch that 3 part Channel 4 documentary on the history of car bombing (which had some close ups of devices and discussions of tactics).
Someone pass me the mind bleach before I'm arrested.
Mine's the one with the lobotomy drill in the pocket.
"Where's Wally?" - The Terryrist Training Guide!
Well, it offers practical advice on camouflage in both urban and rural environments...
Wooooohooooo! We can have ourselves a good old fashioned book burning. I suggest we postpone this till the 10th of May next year though, as that has traditionally been the day to burn "bad" books.
Instead of worrying what people of the UK are reading the government should be rejoicing that the people of the UK are reading anything at all.
My money is on the first things to be burnt are all references to nu labours monumental cockups.
How things have changed!
During WW2, a translated version of 'Mein Kampf" was freely available in the UK .(IIRC, profits went to the Red Cross.)
"It is forbidden" vs "Academic freedom"?
How can sir Colin state in the same paragraph that a historian or sociologist has no right to study a text which has direct connection to a phenomenon in his field (studying terrorism is part of history and sociology) and yet say he upholds academic freedom? You need a fully patched electric monk to believe that or even it will fry a bank of illogic circuits. Even in Germany where Hitler's "Mein Kampf" was banned, historians could read it.
If this is the level of logic sir Colin Campbel can muster, he has no place in academia.
Quite apart from academia, if I were a Muslim, I might well want to understand what drives these fanatics, if only to find counter-arguments (e.g. from the Koran, where you will find many) if you find some member of your family or a friend is coming attracted to the "ideals" of these terrorist. Of course, should you do so, you yourself become a suspect.
What an enlightened society we live in.
How things have changed!
How things have changed!
During WW2, a translated version of 'Mein Kampf" was freely available in the UK .(IIRC, profits went to the Red Cross.)
Interesting inverted racism
Curious to see your otherwise sensible article invoke the mantra that the safety of us all takes second place to ensuring that the privileged legal status of those "not quite white" skinned is maintained. Like most ordinary non-privileged people, I rather resent the fact that I must be subjected to irrelevant and unnecessary harassment in case other members of a privileged racial group responsible for repeated attempts at mass murder feel upset.
Every god-damned aspect of our lives.
Damned control freaks.
I'm with the cops on this.
How about someone having copies of launch codes for Britain's nuclear weapons "for research"? Or how about a manual describing how to make and use date rape drugs effectively? Someone involved in pharmacology might have a legitimate use for such information but it would probably depened on the context of their research.
I don't see why books should have some kind of immunity. If someone has a slide-hammer and a screwdriver whilst working in their garage, that's perfectly reasonable. On the other hand, if someone is found to be carrying the same tools in a car park at 2am, they will probably be arrested for "going equipped to steal". If someone has a book providing instructions on how to make bombs from household materials, it doesnt seem unreasonable for them to explain the context.
Given that Al Qaeda has used British citizens with origins in various Islamic countries to commit acts of terrorism in the UK and abroad, it would seem particularly stupid for someone of that demographic to be in possession of such material.
that's the way, aha aha...
So academic freedom means you can study whatever somebody else allows you to. Great idea. There is also no benefit in giving free access to the "dangerous books" out there as in order to better understand the motives of "evil". Authorities will want to know everything about you and they sure know best what you yourself should know and what not. In fact it would be even better if all those evil books were piled in the streets and set on fire. Autumn is coming anyway, it might get quite atmospheric... look at the decorative flame, makes you all warm and fuzzy.
This is censorship. Why don't we name it so?
We need a list of all the bad books. I can then check all my friends and families bookshelves to ensure they are not terryrists, paedos, or other scum of the state. If they are i can then report them for their crimes.
Interestingly how can i be sure if a book is a bad book without a list? should i inventory all my books and present to the police just in case? what about the library, good grief I could have accidentally come into contact with one of these mind altering things...
Maybe it would be best just to commit suicide in case I am already infected!!
Anonymous because I dont want the special forces to get to me first, wait what was that knock at the door?
Paris because she won't ever be arrested for reading a book..
Sir Colin's Arse...
must indeed be very sore from sitting on the fence, and his fingers likewise from all the lilly-livered hand wringing.
Guilty until proven guilty
You're entirely free to read what you want, but of course you may be held in custody for some time while you are investigated to see if there's any way to twist the law to do you.
Have academics really been reduced this far trying to curry favour with NuLab?
And an open-ended definition of what is forbidden. Even the Catholic Church at least produced an Index of Forbidden Books so you could tell what you weren't allowed to read.
- The world's favorite terrorist manual since 4000 BC!
- Recommended by monarchs, popes and presidents for all your inquisition and invasion needs!
- Learn the amazing secrets of slaughtering impure heretics from the originators of stoning - don't accept crude Islamic imitations!
- Free bonus! Torture, maim or kill anyone, anytime with the included 'god told me to' justification! (For those special occasions, try all three - we call it the 'holy trinity'!)
- And much, much more!
the daily mail
in my view is incitement and inspiration for terrorists, now can we lock up all daily mail readers under their much loved terrorism laws.
I have in mind a protest march....
.... where each person has a copy of the Jihadi HandbookR, Jolly Roger Cookbook (which incidentially I had a copy of when I was a teenager) and some of the more interesting chemistry textbooks.
We then march to Scotland Yard and dare them to arrest us all.
The 'reasonable' defence for possessing said materials? Why taking them on a protest march of course. We'd fill up the court system with cases for months and months!
And then there's "Art"
Similar pushes are occurring Down Under to have "controversial" art pre-approved by some authority not only before publication but before working with the material (or models) in the first place. We've already had the police raid a gallery only to have the material eventually released as it was rated "PG" (which is safe for any age, but recommended for 12 years or older). You'd think that would be enough, but no - now there's a push to replace the people on the classification board with neo-cons.
A slippery slope indeed.
And there are rumours of certain books quietly disappearing from library shelves ...
we are truly becoming the type of society that Islamic fundamentalists "claim" to hate so much.
The extremists are winning
If you think that one of their aims is to undermine our 'free' society, then by the actions of a very small number of people they've provoked disproportionate reactions from the authorities, effectively slowly but surely turning us all into suspected terrorists, simply based on what we might be reading.
Congrats Bin Laden and co!
were useful to the planners of the 7/7 bombings, and to the individual "mules" much more useful than a chemistry textbook (unless they all made whatever it was that went "boom").
This could make all the public literature on public transport and other utilities dangerous to have (Guide books to historic buildings like the Tower of London also have building plans in, and even tell you how thick the walls are and all about their defences, but not I concede about the CCTV). A bored or vindictive plod could make merry with any number of citizens or tourists (especially the non-pink ones).
Although if you have a London Bus Timetable you are more likely to be prosecuted for possession of a "false instrument" (fraudulent document)
I've got a copy of
1. the anarchists cookbook
2. the al-Qaeda training manual
3. the Times obituary of a printer
of the three the last is most useful for terrorist purposes because it describes in sufficient detail how to make a diffusion grating for the purposes of concentrating U235 by means of gas diffusion.
I also have a full set of physics undergraduate text books, including those pertaining to radioactive thingies.
Mine the one that says "come and get me you stupid ephing plod"
re: I'm with the cops on this.
I think the point has been missed with this.
Possession isn't enough to infer intent, as with the slide hammer and screwdriver.
If there is possession and a large amount of fertiliser or ammonia, several trigger mechanisms and a map of London with an X on the Palace, then there is some indication of intent.
Possession of the documents alone don't tell you enough to make a judgement.
rights or wrongs?
Am I the only one wondering if the Country is sleeping through further erosion of our rights in the name of "Security" ???
Government Control in the name of the terrible acts of few have done more to reduce our democracy than any Facist Leader would have hoped. I despair at the ingnorance of our society and wonder when I shall get a call for daring to think for myself!
The very core of our justice system "innocent until proven guilty" fades with every hacker and book that has to prove they are not evil or terrorists. I shall get rid of all my cutlery as that scould be used to take over a plane much as it was in 911 oh and my shoes.
Sounds like UK is already onboard the Mediaval Time Travel Express embracing mind control, paranoia, ignorance and apathy. Wonder if they can catch up with the Stone Age Express from USA.
They've already won
Acts of terrorism are so called because they are intended to induce terror.
Since 9/11 (and probably before but I wasn't as cynical back then), our own governments have kept us in a perpetual state of terror. It seems there's a terrorist round every corner, a paedo in every second house (everyone lives next door to one), the threat that you could be held without charge for 7, 14, 28, 42 days without charge, not to mention that we're all going to die if we don't pay extra for the carbon we emit into the atmosphere (reduction is the key, government-folks!!!). And now the possibility that if you read a chemistry book, which is every day in my job, you may be arrested and held until you provide a legit. excuse! ie guilty until proven innocent! Terrorism indeed.
The terrorists have already won, and our own "elected" spokespersons have become the very thing they say they're fighting (ably assisted by the media, of course).
Tux? Because soon even the penguins will be against us.
wanna ban what you can read?
Missed in the article was the fact that the "Al-Qaeda manual" was downloaded from the US Department of Justice website, from a PC on the university website. Hardly what you'd do if you had "intent". The guy all of this quite openly, there was no secrecy surrounding his intentions. At a push, an interview or surveillance might have been justified, but no more.
Other books to ban, even for research purposes? Here's my list:
Lolita (incitation to paedophilia)
anything by George Orwell
Brave New World
all the SAS series and anything by Tom Clancy (military equipment described in detail!!! should be covered by the secrets act!)
ANY philosopher/poet/artist (might make you think)
and so on...
Let me tell you, book banning/limitation of research are the FIRST THINGS fascists do. In my home country of France, when several cities got a majority National Front council, on of the first steps they did was remove books they didn't like from the public library. They sneakily started with children's books that had images of black/brown people, then moved on to stuff written by foreigners or jews, until the local librarian noticed what was going on (they hadn't told her of course) and she kicked up a stink over it.
Be forever vigilant
I'll read whatever I bloody well please, thank you
Every time I hear of some document or other that we're not supposed to have, in case it can "provide assitance to terrorists", I obtain a copy immediately. I double-dog-dare the Police to arrest me, no returns.
Sadly John Ozimek hits the nail on the head. Unless you are of Pakistani or other unsavoury extraction, you will not be busted for possessing a copy of the US COIN manual.
Sir Colin's remarks are indeed depressing, coming from a senior academic. Why should I have to be engaged in a programme of research to read the documents? A valid defence to a charge of possession should be "Because I wanted to know what was in them".
This is a classic example of the police mind set, a sort of hierarchic brotherhood. Where all are equal at each rank, and the word of a higher rank is full authority.
(Guess what rank the citizenry is..)
>"The university authorities have now made clear that possession of this material is
> not required for the purpose of your course of study nor do they consider it
> legitimate for you to possess it for research purposes."
But the guy is doing a Phd, any method, materials or time taken is his choice, he is judged on the results. While he can get guidance, he doesn't have to get it, or act on it.
In the Police mind though, the university is the higher authority for him, so if they say he doesn't need it, then in their minds he doesn't need it - he's outranked. However it isn't for the university to say whether or not it is required at all. It's not a taught course.
The law is that _he_ must have a "reason", not that the university must give him or validate the reason just that _he_ personally has one. No hierarchy applies, the police are unable to comprehend that there is no superior officer.
Really the CPS should give the pigs a right old bitch slap when they pull this kind of stunt.
Wow I never thought that I was part of a "privileged racial group"! I must remember to tell that to people next time I get racial abuse hurled at me and threatened with extreme violence. They'll back down for sure!
Laws unfortunately have to apply to everyone regardless of their colour or religon. Go back a few years and you'll find that Irish people were targeted because of the IRA and they didn't like it much either. Sure you could just search every brown person in the airport but wouldn't serious terrorists cotton on to that fact and plant explosive devices on other people?
Just because I'm a bit brown I shouldn't have more laws against me than everyone else. I'm tempted to read the Koran just to see what all the fuss is about, but better not do that in public though eh?
Reading a book, whether it is "Mein Kampf", "Terrorism for Dummies" or the complete works of the Marquis de Sade, harms no one and it would be impossible to prove "beyond reasonable doubt" what anyone's intention was in reading such books. That is why the government have overturned the fundamental principles of English law, which have served us well for centuries, and put the burden of proof on the defendant.
Your car thief analogy doesn't work, because someone in a car park with the tools for car stealing is in the same position as someone with a bomb in Waitrose. The analogy you are looking for is a student downloading "The Zen Guide to Car Breaking". Should that be illegal?
The current wave of terrorism has killed less people in this country than a fortnight of traffic accidents, yet the government is prepared rip up the rules of evidence and send the police out looking for people with books.
@ "I'm with the cops on this"
That's the point: there is the "going equipped" law (fuzzy though it may be). There's the similarly open-ended "loitering with intent." The anti-terror laws SHOULD have been drafted in similar language; there's a large body of case law, it would have removed the hand-wringing over the word 'reasonable', and it likely would have been clearer all round.
So why didn't they?
Just burn all the pesky books...
Whats that smell ???
Lets just burn all books........then there is no chance of reading the wrong ones.
I read about that happening somewhere ......now where was it ???
Paris?? no but it was somewhere in Europe........
"that the Act is likely to be applied in a selective and racist fashion – with individuals whose skin is not quite white being far more likely to be asked to justify what is on their bookshelves or hard drive"
Islam is not a race - it's a religion. Therefore applying this law to Muslims is not racist.
It's a fact that most muslims are non-white. And most muslims are terrorists :-)
The particular irony being...
..that the *Al-Quaeda Training Manual* in question was originally downloaded from...
the U.S. Department of Justice website.
I've been following this case since it came to the fore some time ago, and have a friend at Nottingham Univ who keeps me informed of developments. The gist of the matter running on for so long is that the Univ over-reacted and abdicated their academic responsibility by handing the matter over to the Police, who also over-reacted, then when it was discovered that there was no actual case to answer, couldn't bring themselves (either of them) to admit that there'd been a mistake. Shamefully, habeas corpus seemed to be asleep at the time.
But, as has been noted several times already in the UK media
if the two concerned didn't have brown skin and Middle-Eastern sounding names, no-one would have batted an eyelid as the material was perfectly legitimate and being used for appropriate research purposes. The non-issue of Yezza's immigration status in the UK was cynically used by the authorities to *muddy the waters* as the University were fully aware of his staus as was later confirmed. The real issue here is not one of terrorism or its prevention, but of quasi-institutionalised racism, and personal and professional freedom. Having said that. at least neither of them had a pistol emptied in the back of their heads whilst on their way to work....
A very shameful reflection on the current state of affairs in Nu-Labor's gulag island.
I for one welcome our book burning overlords!
Now excuse me it'll take me a while to get into these boots.
Fear not your perfectly reasonable and seamingly sensible logic shall continue to see our nation go down the road of xenophobic hate and ineffectual restriction of intellectual freedom and interest. As those things just serve to fuel the hate, and extend it. Soon the Governments of the west wont just have Islamic Jihadists to fear, but intellectuals and free thinkers too. When pushed into a corner any person can commit acts thought impossible.
No one in this nation (or any free and just society) should ever go to prison unless it can be proved beyond any reasonable doubt that they commited or intended to commit a crime, and there should be harsh punishments for those who bring frivilous charges on the innocent.
Before all those sitting too high on their morale horses to see the ground get going....
When it was brought to the Police's attention by the Uni, it was the fact that Mr Yezza was the one downloading the material - someone who DID NOT have a reason to be doing so. As soon as it became clear that that the material had been downloaded at the request of Nr Sabir, who DID have a reason to download it, the case was closed. The subsequent investigation of Mr Yezza for immigration issues is completely separate, and the vague and libelous linking of the two is just blatent opportunism by the liberal-minded, desperate to find something so they can scream their second favourite accusation("Racist!") seeing as they have a real problem formulating a reasoned argument against "The Man". Should this be shown to be as empty an accusation as their usual bleating, I'm sure Mr Ozimek will fall back on the liberal's number one favourite bleat - "Fascist!"
So, let's not waste too much time on Mr Ozimek's bleating, let's just focus on one or two of his more farcial statements in order to show his weak train of (group)thought.
"....First, the law: If you possess dodgy material, it is for you to explain why...." And why not? If the Police find you carrying a gun or an explosive device, would you expect them to say "well, that's OK, we have to first prove you mean to shoot/blow-up someone"? No, it is simply illegal. Likewise, the law states that it is illegal to be in ownership of certain prohibited materials UNLESS you have a valid reason such as academic research. Mr Yezza did not have such a reason until it was explained he was merely fulfilling the request of someone who DID have such a valid reason. UK laws are largely set by the UK government, so if you don't like the law then please feel free to vote for which ever lunatic fringe group you think will give you the anarchic rights you wish for, just don't expect the rest of us to. We're a little more capable of realising a balance needs to be struck, and at the moment the balance seems quote fine to the majority, despite Mr Ozimek's alarmist bleating.
"....What the Police appear to be saying is that you can be given the all-clear as a bona fide researcher of terror material in the morning – then re-arrested the same evening for the same offence. Surely not, one might think, but that possibility is within the bounds of the Law...." It is also quite possible the Police could investigate someone for drug-smuggling, prostitution, fraud or any one of a dozen illegal activities without proof beforehand, that is the reason for the investigation, to find evidence. And whilst the Police may decide not to pursue an arrest in the morning for any of those said crimes, should new evidence or the significance of evidence found in the morning lead to a re-think, they can also turn around and arrest for the same illegal activity in the afternoon. Mr Ozimek's wild accusation is that the Police will do this on some whim, no doubt driven in his eyes by their "blatent racism/fascism". Excuse me, but I think someone here is being a bit prejudiced, and so far it's not the Police. Oh, and I do not deny being prejudiced against the liberal-minded as I find their idiocy irritating.
"....This has therefore provoked the accusation, in some quarters, that the Act is likely to be applied in a selective and racist fashion – with individuals whose skin is not quite white being far more likely to be asked to justify what is on their bookshelves or hard drive..." Ah, here we go - "Racist!" Can you provide proof of such bias? Before you start bleating about racial profiling, please can you also admit as to which racial group the July 7th bombers belonged to? Which religion they espoused, whether you contend it was a "corrupted" version or not? If I do a network security threat analysis I would prioritise my likely attackers into groups such as disgruntled employees, recent students (yes, the young and knowledgeable are more likely to try hacking before the experience of age adds a little wariness, I can vouch for that from personal experience), so am I being prejudiced against these groups? No, I am just being realistic. Whilst it would be unfair to say the only threat to us is coming from the Asian Muslim community, it is also head-in-the-sand liberalism to ignore the fact that the next suicide bomber in the UK is more than likely going to come from that group, and I do expect the Police to be expanding the majority of their anti-terror investigations into the Asian Muslim community. Not to do so would be to avoid their main reason for being - to protect the general public, which includes the rest of the Asian Muslim community - in favour of moronic political correctness.
"....Yes, this is the law, but one might have hoped for greater insight into the question of whether it should be so from a senior member of a university. Sir Colin is buying into the notion that there are “dangerous books” out there – and the only way to avoid danger is to check with authority first. But once the authorities start to dictate what books or documents we may possess, we are on a slippery slope...." It is a simple reality that danger does not only come in the physical form of weapons, but that the written (or typed) word can be even more dangerous when the idiotic/dupeable are exposed to them. Would the author contend the banning of "Mein Kampf" in Austria is unfair? Unlikely. So, if Sir Colin had been dean of a Austrian university that found a student downloading "Mein Kampf" - an illegal act in Austrian universities without an explicit Austrian government licence for historic study - would you expect him to not refer the case to the local Police? Ah, but then anti-Nazism is cool with the groupthink of liberalism. It is also an accepted common thought in UK society that Nazism is bad. So, would Mr Ozimek be writing such drivel if Mr Yezza had been a skinhead from Essex calling himself Adolf Smith, and he had been caught downloading something like "The Protocols of The Elders of Zion"? I suspect not. So I suppose what Mr Ozimek is saying is that we shouldn't trust the authorities as qualified to say what is a "dangerous book" but he feels just fine in telling us what he thinks is "dangerous". Whilst Mr Ozimek gets down off his horse he may want to look into both some head deflation, the realities of the terrorist threat to the UK, and the dificult job faced by our Police and intelligence services in trying to detect and defeat that threat before it kills again.
You describe arrest on indication, not on proof. I can carry as many screwdrivers, glass cutters, crowbars, hammers etc. as I wish as long as my location is not a designated "no screwdrivers" zone or you actually catch me in the act of breaking into a car that is not mine or belonging to someone who told me to open it up for him.
Also, I was under the impression that I could acquire any knowledge I deem interesting as long as I do not employ all those evil skills taken from evil books to actually commit some evil. As far as I know I could also cover myself in lard and prowl my premises at night with a running chainsaw as long as I did not cut anyone up and nobody complained about the noise.
The point is: What I do at home (and to a lesser degree in public) and what I fill my head with is entirely my own business as long as it is not detrimental to others. If you find in my home on my desk a plan on how to make a bomb that's entirely my business. If I have a plan on where to place it / whom to kill with it right next to it, that is when you're allowed to ask questions. After answering my first question to you, namely "what the heck are you doing snooping around in my house and where is your court order?"
The rights to personal freedom and privacy involve an element of risk. You cannot remove that element of risk without severe damage to freedom and privacy.
'privileged legal status of those "not quite white" skinned'
I think you'll find that there is no "privileged legal status" for non-whites in the UK; only a greater likelihood of being targeted by those paid to uphold the law.
Your remarks seem to be a bit "Daily Mail"...
Anon, because I've been on holiday and now have a bit of a tan...
What a load of rubbish.
The thing about information is that sometimes people are just interested in it.
Hell when I am waiting down the barbers and there is a copy of the Daily Mail sat there, I have been bored enough to read it. Does that automatically make me a hateful fascist idiot?
I'm pretty sure that on one of my old scrap computers at home somewhere on the HDD will be a copy of the anarchist's cookbook - Something which is almost certainly on the watchlist of dodgy texts as it describes how to make improvised explosive devices. I have no good reason to have it - It was just there and I downloaded it because I was curious, but then this was back in the days before September 11th when we were innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.
I am also a hoarder of books and if you went through my bookshelves you would find books on cannabis cultivation and joint rolling although I've never grown the stuff and haven't smoked it since my wayward youth. Also a book by Alexander Shulgin that describes in great detail how to make dozens of class a drugs - even though I have never attempted to make or take any of them.
So by your definition (and the state's) because I cannot give a good reason for owning those materials apart from 'I was curious' I must be a drug-dealing-pothead-terrorist. Oh wait - It's ok though isn't it - Because my skin isn't brown.
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face … for ever."
Thanks buddy. You are the type of person responsible for taking away people's freedoms "to protect yourself, your family" blah blah blah. Hope you sleep well at night knowing that the terrorists can still kill you, but your fellow countryman can go to jail for reading about it.
Everyone who values freedom should download at least one book
This country has really gone to the dogs. Part of the reason for such a gulf betwen the would be terrorists and the rest of the population is too little is understood of each sides views.
This is really becoiming a police state when the police tell us what we can or cannot read. Or is it a catholic state? Burn books, burn people who don't conform to the doctrines of the state and church.
Where are the libertarians they are very quiet?
Policemen search my coat pockets to see if I have any banned books on me.
So the US govt are now terrorists
After all, Sabir originally downloaded the document from a US govt website. Surely they are guilty of disemminating material that could be of use to a terrorist.
Where would the SAS Survival Handbook sit in all this - I still have a copy from when I was in the scouts. I reckon 90% of the copies sold were to young teenage boys. Just to be on the safe side, we'd best lock up everyone who was in the scouts for 42 days while we check they haven't been using that orienteering and fire-lighting knowledge for terrorism.
I'd suggest moving to another country, but can't think of one off the top of my head that won't be full of the same sort of crap in a few short years.
Moving Onto Higher Ground and Into dDeeper Spaces.
I think that you may have missed the point and not Sir Colin Campbell, although that also may be too harsh as you have carefully caveated your argument without stating facts, and suggestably posing questions that are debatable. Bravo. ......... "Well, he would say that, wouldn’t he? But perhaps, by opting for what might be considered the “Nuremberg Defence”,....."
I thought the Bold Knight hit the nail Right on the Head but then one can expect such from an Academic Environ Offering, thus to Deliver, Mastery in CyberPsychology with QuITe Necessary and Whitty Repartee ..... http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/08/13/uk-offer-masters-cyberpsychology.
And how Refreshingly Bold of El Reg to be so Actively Engaged. Bravo, Bold Damsels and Brave Knights of the Virtual Realm.
And Paris because Love Springs Eternal there, and in the Spring time too .....
"I love paris in the spring time
I love paris in the fall
I love paris in the summer when it sizzles
I love paris in the winter when it drizzles
I love paris every moment
Every moment of the year
I love paris, why oh why do I love paris
Because my love is here"
To sir Colin
I was considering taking up a position at Nottingham uni. when this story broke.
Needless to say, I didn't.
That's mine. The one with the P45 in the pocket.
Rhyme of the morning
With each authoritarian law
The terrorists win a little more.
@ "Index of Forbidden Books"
Oh, mark my words, that'll be coming soon, although it's likely to be the inverse, an "Index of Permitted Reading".
And it'll be very, very short.