agree that it seems like state is expanding it's powers just for the fun of it at the moment. i - like many who read indymedia - probably just expect the state to naturally attempt to expand it's power at all times (i'm sure you could quote marx, kropotkin, proudhon, goldman, and so on endlessly on this if you were that way inclined). but like you the way they're doing it at present seems particularly designed to infuriate. it's as if they're so complacent about the prospects of resistance to their rule that they invent bits of legislation like this just to show us how weak we are in being unable to resist. it's like some horrible clownish "resistance is futile" barked out from the most ridiculous gobbling turkeys they could plaster in TV-makeup and squeeze into ill-fitting suits (no offence to turkeys, the metaphor should probably be headless chickens or head-in-the-sand ostriches anyway). imagine if they controlled the media like berlusconi... oh, actually, after didcot getting ignored and the gaza broadcast being banned, etc etc it seems they do...

still, they backed down over id cards right? resistance is *fertile*!

It's interesting who they are recruiting. also re ID its also interesting who can be traced. it seems like a protection racket. yes you too can get employemtntif you do their dirty work and don't mind fucking people over.

It cracks me up how many time whinges appear in the comments on Indymedia about how the mainstream media is entirely under the control of the Government and wouldn't expose its plans... directly under a piece linking to an article by the mainstream media.

And which Gaza TV thing was "banned"? I seem to recall the DEC ad was shown on ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5, among others.

Peter, your comment expressed my feelings clearer than I could. The one thing you said I find arguable is whether resistance stopped ID cards or whether the government just couldn't afford to implement it after bailing out the crooked banks. Pascals wager advises that it's best that you assume it was abandoned due to opposition or else resistance will seem futile. Anything that isn't a defeat should be proclaimed a victory. As to your title 'incompetence or conspiracy', on most issues that appear to be either a cock-up or a conspiracy I always assume that they are both. (Ignore Norvello, anyone can see it is another of their trolling comments designed to distract using a strawman argument, since you never mentioned the media).

I just watched the Panorama programme [1] that shows the POCA doesn't affect the seriously rich criminals, and then I read the comments in this blog [2] that implies prosecutions are sometimes pursued not to recover criminal profit but solely to steal cash from soft targets.

Seriously rich criminals are simply honest businessmen in todays society, and the only people prosecuted are the poor.

[1]  http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00j8fnj
[2]  http://www.power-to-the-people.co.uk/2009/03/poca-yes-crime/

What do you mean that Peter didn't mention the media?

See above: "imagine if they controlled the media like berlusconi... oh, actually, after didcot getting ignored and the gaza broadcast being banned, etc etc it seems they do..."

It's not a strawman argument - he's said the government controls the media in response to a story that is little more than a link to the mainstream media. It's a fat irony.

It's also not trolling to point out when a comment is factually incorrect. I was addressing his comment, not your piece. Peter said the gaza broadcast was banned, when it was shown on ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5. Various posters on here have also been getting there knickers in the twist suggesting there's been a cover-up of the Didcot protests. This seems a bit strange when there have been more than 35 mainstream media reports on Didcot (including Guardian, BBC, Telegraph, Oxford Mail and Reuters).

yeah... re: mainstream media, whatever... it was a throwaway joke at the end of my comment - i wasn't really suggesting that the government controls the media - with the gaza thing i was referring to the bbc specifically, with didcot is does seem a little odd that - though there have been stories in the mainstream press, these have not given comparable attention to ratcliffe, which given that the action has been more succesful and is clearly connected is a little odd. especially if you've been listening to the news and been thinking that maybe there've been some not quite so important stories getting on there... yes it's mildy ironic that the original post was a mainstream article... but if you're so tired of the whinging about the mainstream media, why are you looking at/posting on indymedia? i'm not going to go into all the arguments that though not government controlled the media definately censors by omission etc etc... look at chomsky for that.

but most importantly, it was a throw away comment/joke. if you're not a troll, why not ignore little things like that, and debate serious points? like the *actual issue* of advancing state power

Sorry then, but it still seems like nit-picking a far better comment than I could think up. If you want to argue how free or controlled the media is then medialens.org is a more expert and focussed place for that than here.You have to admit, it is getting to the stage where the Home Office could announce the slaughter of the first-born child in every household and expect no more serious opposition that a critical petition by the chattering classes or maybe a sit-down protest by a few 'terrorists'.
This law hasn't worked against serious criminals so they are extending it to powerless punters, and the more repressive and hypocritical the law the more all laws are exposed as unjust and ineffectual.
"Laws are like cobwebs, which may catch small flies, but let wasps and hornets break through"