@Jon Kale

What on earth do you see in those policies (many of which I disagree with DD on BTW) that makes you say "civil liberties only apply if you're male and heterosexual"? What are you on, or is this just another case of "OMG Tory == EVIL lol"?

Jon Kale is bang on

David Davis is right on this issue, but he is no civil libertarian. He voted against reducing the age of consent from 21 to 18 and he voted against equalising it to 16. Unless you believe gay people don't deserve equality, you cannot call him a civil libertarian.

@Pete James

"supporting civil liberties doesn't mean being opposed to capital punishment"

Maybe not, but it's a fairly contradictory position to take.

Regardless of his position on civil liberties, I won't be voting for somebody who believes that killing people is so wrong that we should, er, kill people for it.

As for the fact that he holds a qualification in computer science, (a) he clearly doesn't use it/know how to use it, (b) it is probably years past its sell-by date anyway and (c) if he DOES know anything about IT, he should have a chat with Cameron, who is cosying up to some rather unpleasant IT types these days.

@ various confused and/or sceptical and/or argumentative

Pedant alert icon. Hmmm

Math Campbell > "A Tory. Defending civil liberties. Against the Socialists.

Something about that doesn't compute. No, really, it doesn't.

WTF is going on in this country???? > loop echo end-loop

You have been mistaught (in small part by intent and in large part by inertia of ignorance) to think of the domain of political opinion as comprising a univocal function over the range of real colours from red at extreme left to blue at extreme right (ordered, but not spectrally-ordered). You have been invited, without proof or experimental verification, to map the domain of political PoVs onto that range in an unambiguous way. You now discover the function doesn't compute as expected. You suspect the input or the operational procedure.

Dear Math,

It is the function that is suspect. The correct mapping of political opinion requires at least 3 dimensions (no proof supplied here) - you have been working in 1. However even a 2 dimensional mapping will clarify the political scene inordinately hmmm. This is because you will immediately see how such a 2-dim mapping reduces to the ideologically certified 1-dim map that is propagated everywhere in the media by projection onto the hmmm abscissa.

Expressed geometrically, the domain of this better function is diamond shaped, and parametrized by monotonically increasing values on adjacent sides. OK - your name is still Math? Nice. The parameters are (1) degree of economic liberty, (2) degree of personal liberty. The apices therefore are determined as follows:

1. (at left) zero economic liberty, max personal liberty

2. (at right) zero personal liberty, max economic liberty

3. (at bottom) zero economic liberty, zero personal liberty

4. (at top) max economic liberty, max personal liberty

1 is aka socialism, communism, etc

2 is aka free-market conservatism esp allied with religious zealotry, some half-baked types of fascism

3 is aka authoritarianism, totalitarianism, fully-baked fascism, etc

4 is aka libertarianism, anarchism, etc

Mid values of economic and social liberty are aka liberalism aka sitting on the fence, and recognizable in the UK by forests of green bollards populating pedestrianized market town centres. (BTW does anyone recall this being a lib dem manifesto commitment for bruised kneecaps?)

I anticipate your first question will be WTF do I stand, i.e WTF in this domain is your spot? The skinny is here *** http://www.friesian.com/quiz.htm ***. Follow the link "The World's Smallest Political Quiz" and all will be revealed - to you - and you alone.

But as amanfromMars might say - to XXXX love is to share. Superior InteL is the AIm. Compute IT.

Fuck Democracy !??

The fact of the matter is that we have an increasingly surveillance based justice system that is increasingly unable to deliver.

Not long before armageddon. It will be a simple war over freedom, food, water or some such. It is already happening in some parts of the world.

For democracy to succeed we have to have freedom of choice. In protection of the populace freedom is being reduced by our "goverment", which we did not vote in (if you have sense that is).

I truly respect David Davis on this one. He has given us options to vote him out with the choices available. OK - it's our choice as people. Thank you DD. At least this guiy is representing the people of this country.

It's amazing

Bloody amazing when El Reg swings Tory. But I think lots of us are uncomfortably settlings into the 'best of a bad bunch' camp. Me, I'm with the Lib Dems. Bunch of sore-arsed fence sitters they might be but with a good ole Socialist upbringing from the days when the Reds wuz real the Toryness has put me in a spot here. But that said, it depends on where you're living. If I was here with ole Davis, I might become a quiet closet Tory.

I didn't realise that Tons becoming the great Bush's lapdog would go quite this far. Amazing.

KNOCK KNOCK ... Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ)

"he should have a chat with Cameron, who is cosying up to some rather unpleasant IT types these days." ..... By Anonymous Coward Posted Friday 4th July 2008 17:39 GMT

That is as may be, AC, but they are pretty ineffective , which when allied to rather unpleasant only suggests/confirms that Dave is out of his depth in the Field. All IT requires though, to completely reverse that Perception, is a Simple Change to much better, pleasant IT Types who are also effective/to AI Beta , whose pleasant IT types are also much more effective.

One would naturally assume that whatever Controls Governments is liable for that Asset and will bear ITs Cost ......thus Virtually making IT, Practically 4Free2 ..... or at least, at No Cost to the Public Purse.

this guy..

should be primeminister

Umm....

"Kudos to the man, but, lets face it, he is a member of the nasty party....The Conservatives have not changed, they still listen to the voice of the Daily Mail....the very people that were happy with 42 days."

So, let me get this straight, you advocate NOT voting for David Davis because he SUPPORTS 42 days? I know the Socialist Workers Party are able to believe that black is white in their continual class war, but I have rarely seen it argued so openly.

Mind you, the Reg is hardly helping. There IS a very important principle here, that you should NOT be imprisoned without charge. For a single day. So Davis does not look quite so principled when you realise he supports imprisonment without charge for 28 days, and when asked why simply says that the police convinced him with secret evidence. As for the Reg's statement that here we have a great man, who both has principles and is pragmatic.... well!!!

Anonymous Coward

'"supporting civil liberties doesn't mean being opposed to capital punishment"

Maybe not, but it's a fairly contradictory position to take.'

Not really. The freedom to take the consequences of your actions makes all the other freedoms mean something.

Personally, I don't want the death penalty. It's hard to unkill someone when you find out you've got it wrong. And once you've earned a death penalty, why bother half-heartedly resisting arrest?

But there are arguments that we can't afford the justice we need without having "death" be one of the consequences.

I can understand them and disagree with them at the same time.

You can't, it seems.

IT's a Devil of a Job, but somebody has to do IT?

"But there are arguments that we can't afford the justice we need without having "death" be one of the consequences." ... By Mark

Posted Saturday 5th July 2008 17:29 GMT .

It is somewhat Perverse to debate Opposition to Capital Punishment whenever it is delivered daily, with in some cases, a corrupting impunity and immunity, to so many Innocents on the Whim of a Guilty Few for the Greater Benefit of None but even Fewer still.

War is Hell and everyone knows who stokes the fires/feeds the flames in that domain.

Re. Anagram?

I seem to remember, when I last voted in the UK (now in NZ), going into the Polling Station where an official gave me a voting slip after having written a number in pencil on it. Then said official ticked my name on a list and wrote the number on the list as well. Or am I mis-remembering? If not, it means that for years it has been possible to know which way someone votes.....

Coat? Because mine was on a few years ago to leave the country that was once home, until Zanu-Labah got in.

Labour? Socialist?!

NuLab - Putting the National into Socialist since 1994!

Re: 2D Politics

I've had a bash at The World's Smallest Political Quiz, and it gives a broadly decent result, but for 2D politics I prefer the similar, but more in depth, Political Compass (http://www.politicalcompass.org/).

UK Parties 2008 is a particularly interesting read for us UKians. I first saw it a few years ago now, but every time I see it, the "party drift over the years" image (http://www.politicalcompass.org/images/enPartiesTime.gif) leaves me in disbelief. I know a few people who've done the test, and only a very very few end up outside the bottom left quadrant. Usually edging slightly into the top right quadrant slightly.

Other interesting RotW points:

The EU Political Compass shows the Nordic countries as the only place left with any liberty. But we already knew that, eh?

And the US Primaries candidates plot tells us that, for all our crowing from this side of a pond, the Democrats are a more centred proposition than NewLabour.

I've put a request in for a Scottish plot. By the time they get to it, there might not even be a Labour party to put on it if the SNP momentum and Labour's implosion in the Glasgow East by-election continues apace. Gutted that I'm in the adjacent constituency and just a ferw hundred yards away from potentially doing my small bit to pull the rug from under 'em.

Also: @ Lee - "If he believes in democracy he should have accepted the vote on 42 days. If he cannot live with that he should have resigned permanently."

Mr Davis, like many others is just as concerned by the shady behind-the-scenes machinations that preceeded the 42 days vote as he is by the issue that was being voted on. The vote was a sham and had nothing to do with democracy.

I'm no particular fan of Diane Abbott, but she explains it better than I ever could. Read her speech and then come back and tell me that all's well at Westminster. Link to speech: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/jun/12/terrorism.civilliberties

Icon = All aboard! Proportional representation, ahoy!

NuLab "mesmerised by tech".

I don't think so. For a start I think most of 'em are rabid Luddites at heart who still regard the Breville sandwich maker as the work of Satan and see the pocket calculator as a prime example of confusing new-fangled gadgetry.

Deer in the headlights of the Big Consultancies and their bottomless lunchtime expense accounts? Now that would make more sense.

The road to Damascus...

I have spent a long time wondering how on earth the current load of congenital idiots were voted into power not once, not twice, but three times.

Reading some of the comments here which so intelligently resort to anglo-saxon terminology of four letters in their description(s) of David Davis has made the scales fall from my eyes.

I am amazed that there are sufficient numbers ostensibly from the higher part of the bell-shaped curve of intellectual ability - indicated by their reading El Reg - who come out with the tired old cliches of class warfare which actually ceased to be valid decades ago.

Their vituperative character assassination speaks volumes for their small minds - and it is exactly their mindset which permits the criminalising and imprisoning of dissidents solely for having a different viewpoint.

Reid, Straw & co are all ex-card carrying communists. Why is it that the left and their fellow-travelers become so dictatorially authoritarian if they achieve power?

There is a definite lesson to be learned.....(If I can use Gov't/Civil Service answer #42 here)

cc...David Davis, a Leader with AI Following and ITs Support, Based in the Cloud?*

A Class Act, Billy Ruffian. Bravo [42 Zero]. To Server Servers and Protect is ITs AIMission.

Cinderella RockerFeller ProgramMIng @ ur Service ...... OHMSAIS. ...... which is QuITe Impossible to Plausibly Deny whenever IT is written before you.

* A Novel Question Clouded in Fact.

Lots of other advanced countries have ID cards - what's the problem?

If loads of other countries put their heads in the oven would you do the same?

Does Apathy nest here too?

"amanfromMars .... Actions speak louder than words. End." ..... By Fuion

Posted Tuesday 8th July 2008 17:54 GMT

Indeed they can, Fuion...... which is why CCHQ has alien mail and also why words are shared here.

And whether that be for Action, Reaction, ProAction or HyperRadioProActivity will depend upon the Third Party Mindset and its IQs.

And given all the Phishing Tales that we hear, that would also be a BetaTest of GCHQ too.

I trust that would constitute action by any standard which you would/could apply, Fuion.

Please be assured that one would not be confined to requiring their understanding though, for it may very well be that they are ill-equipped and badly prepared to be effective active partners, although one would love to be proved wrong on such matters.

An Embarrassment of Riches ...... can easily Bring Down Brown-Shirted/Corrupt Governments

And to date, as I'm sure you will not be surprised, both HQs are proving themselves to be Totally Unfit for Future Purpose in AI and ITs Total Information Awareness Society.

Here's a dumb question? ....Do you think it has anything to do with the fact that all communications are easily monitored/phished and therefore they are petrified to communicate?

I trust that they realise that that particular problem is easily countered and overcome whenever third party communication is made globally public rather than remaining channelled to them out of public sight.