大象传媒

Yet again we have a huge breach of data security by a government department.

Yet again the Information Commissioner is not going to take any action against the organization concerned or prosecute those responsible.

Had this been a small business somewhere, everyone involved would now be facing jail.

When are people going to realize that the greatest threat to their information's security is from the government who know all to well that their lap dog Richard Thomas - will never enforce any penalties against them so why do they need to make sure information is safe?

When are Newsnight going to interview Richard Thomas about his refusal to ever enforce the Data Protection Act or Freedom of Information Act against those government departments who flout it daily?

Answer - PROBABLY NEVER.

Good evening all and sundry.

I hope that before you compare one against the other one has done ones homework with regard to French beurocracy not only for it's own indigenous population but also for all those ex pats who for one reason or another have chosen to live here. Even if you speak the lingo it's terribly difficult slashing your way through the French 'civil service'. I am sure its a way of perpetuating thier exsistance by being obstructive. There would appear to be very little communication between one office and another. for instance the Bank Credit agricole who have branches all over the country do not recognise a branch of the same name in the next department.

So before slagging off the differances think how lucky you are. at least you are still talking to your customers.

The Chancellor says they don't believe the disks have fallen into the wrong hands - he would say that, wouldn't he!!
I have lodged a petition on the Downing Street website about this.
The risk of identity theft and financial loss for every UK family is huge. Even if the disk are 'found' there can be no guarantee that the data has not been compromised. If a copy of the data exists somewhere, it will DEFINATELY fall into the wrong hands eventually .
To overcome this, the government must:
1. Underwrite the loss or damage any citizen suffers as a result of their data becoming compromised.
2. Undertake to fund the cost of every number type compromised (NI, Bank Account, etc, etc) being replaced with a new number. That may be the only way to invalidate the value of the data lost.

utter disgrace how can you lose 25 million people's information...

Hi Newsnight

this post will invite ridicule, anyone remember the guy on tv talking about the problem of t##d in the punchbowl, our sense our curiosity being dulled by the ridiculous, but we need to keep an open inquiring mind, keep asking the questions etc,

so that said we should accept what has being accepted at face value, sure but still keep a bit of an open mind, keep looking at the possibilities,

all I want to say is that to me the story tonight about the discs doesn鈥檛 really tally, would anyone really download 25 million names and details and send them by ordinary post when there are I presume electronic ways to deliver the information instantly and securely?

doesn鈥檛 seem to make sense?

best wishes
Bob

Of course ALL the media have missed the most important point. These missing Cd's are not important.

There are more vital questions however.

1. Can any employee at this department simply to to a computer and burn a CD of confidential data?

2. Why do the computers there HAVE CD's fitted to them?

3. How many more CD's have been made and possibly sold on by corrupt staff?

4. Do staff have access to this data out of office hours and are CD's of this data simply left lying around (for the cleaners to come across)

5. I worked for a company many years ago that allowed to back up devices to be fitted to any computer. Only authorised IT people could back up data.

6. Can any of this data be emailed out? What's the point of politicians whining about missing CD's if staff are able to email this stuff around?

7. Are records kept of who makes copies and how often?

8. Is the burning of CD data supervised?

I could go on. Yet not ONE of the above questions have been asked by a journalist at the 大象传媒, Sky or Channel 4.

Please if someone reads this Get Paxo or whoever to ask these questions.

It gives new meaning to the term "the lost generation."

Why did they use TNT rather than the Royal Mail? Trying to beat a strike?

Interesting, isn't it that when the data is posted through Royal Mail it reaches its destination - when it is sent by their privatised TNT courier it goes missing .......

Vince Cable was superb in The House, not least in pinning responsibility on Gordon Brown and highlighting the different approaches to resignation!
And the first major breach is March: when Gordon Brown was the Chancellor.
No lesson was it seems learned then?

Also for what legitimate purpose does the National Audit Office require this level of detail about individuals anyway?

Shocking news.

In this day and age where we all take personal care to protect our identity from fraud,we are lumbered with an incompetent government who just about give the details away.

Why on earth where the disks even shipped. Has the Government not heard about Network connectivity.

Shocking behaviour and of course the Government are not capable of getting it sorted.

Why is the banking system made responsible to monitor this. Of course this will raise the cost to the public.

Will the Government really make amends for any financial loss.

The Government does not instil confidence in the public with its desire to move to digital government.

I have less faith in government IT systems now than I had before today.

I am listening to Newsnight on the subject of the data loss fiasco. If I heard correctly, the government has asked for reports from the Metropolitan Police and Price Waterhouse. The police and a firm of accountants for God's sake? What about talking to someone who knows a thing or two about data storage, protection and delivery. This information should have been encrypted and should only have been transfered electronically. Anyone who transfered this material - whether on disc, on a laptop on on a mobile device - is certifiably insane and should be summarily dismissed. More to the point, any organisation which countenances these practices is not to be trusted with the data. Basically, the government is such an organisation and richly deserves the absolute contempt in which it will doutbless be held.

However, as we all know, contempt is one thing, accountability another. When ducking to avoid the whitewash, stay down because the buck, travelling at high speed will not be far behind.

all this after the recent announcments by Gordon Brown on collecting more data on travellers for 'security' and anti terrorist measures.
This goverment seems to be attempting more and more collection of big personal databases for its own use with little understanding or regard for the dangers this creates. They have proved beyond doubt they are incapable of managing the data they already have. Time to review the risk versus benefit.

Never in the field of Human endeavour has so much damage and grief been caused by so many useless clowns. If the Empire should last a thousand years, they will still say 'and they won HOW many elections?'
Seriously, this government demonstrates almost on a daily basis that they couldn't run a bath without an instruction manual.

The mind boggles (what does that mean?) at the number of databases on which various of our details appear. The databases belong to organisations with different or even competing interests. There seems to be a vast trade in information thus collected.
For some reason we all seem willing to give our details to anyone offering some object or service we think we need. It should come as no surprise that disks and so on get lost, stolen or dealt with carelessly. However state-of-the-art technology becomes it is programmed and operated by the same imperfect guys that used ledgers etc. If information was lost by a commercial operation would we ever find out?
It's unlikely that businesses would make such a happening known to competitors. There is enough fraud to judge by the media reports to show how fragile it all is. How else would spies scrape a living?

Regarding tonight鈥檚 edition and the feature on the security debacle;
An excellent edition, the subject covered well and with great professionalism, well done.
My only comments would be on the general view.
Next time this kind of thing happens [since it seems to be quite a regular event] might it not be pointed out that New Labour seems to have developed a few tricks to deal with criticism. The most obvious seems to be the nodding of the head and agreement that yes, mistakes have been made and that lessons need to be learned.
Perhaps this is acceptable [just] in its first year or two in power. But after ten years?
There would seem to be a secondary pattern emerging here, too. That of immediately commissioning a short term investigation followed by a long term version. A very good means of softening the blow and allowing public anger, frustration and, in this particular case, incredulity to soften.

Personally I am becoming tired of hearing that it鈥檚 no ones fault鈥xcept the poor temp who happened to end up doing the front line job and who was obviously not trained properly. I'm also very pleased to hear your 'expert' reinforcing the dangers inherent in vast centralised data banks. This should be a cause of concern to us ALL.

motna

I'm afraid that this was an accident waiting to happen. The problem is that we have experts in this country who have been warning the Government for some time that there are dangers.

They don't listen, and they don't listen for (at least!) 3 reasons:

(1) they are not strong enough to admit that previous decisions have been wrong - partly because they over-estimate the power of a strong and enquiring press,

(2) there is an arrogance amongst politicians that leads them to forget that they are paid and appointed by the voters / taxpayers,and encouraged by the fact that they carry no financial or legal penalty when things go seriously wrong,

(3) management in the civil service, despite the very high academic qualifications of many, is amateur, unfocussed, and unaccountable.

I'm afraid I just don't trust civil service management; I expect politicians to lie; and am ashamed of the being a British citizen.

This is Brown's fault. It was he who combined the Revenue and Customs and boasted about the savings, preening himself as usual. He got rid of the people who knew how to run things and put in yes-men and beginners in their place. Another Labour foul-up, this time a really big one.

*shouts* pair of new pants for Mr. Darling! He looked like he needed them.

I cannot believe how every so often the whole of government and it's departments give off the air of a group of people playing at being in government in a big roleplay experiment.

To look after it (Geoff at Post 9) - since the lawful custodians obviously cannot.

鈥淭here are more Britons living abroad than foreigners living in Britain鈥�, according to Nick Clegg.

A more acute interviewer than Jeremy Paxman might have felt moved to point out that 鈥渁broad鈥� is a substantially larger place than 鈥淏ritain鈥� and that the area of Britain that immigrants generally choose to occupy 鈥� the South-East 鈥� is among the most crowded regions anywhere on earth. Since no one is proposing the compulsory repatriation of Britons abroad, I fail to see the point of his assertion.

Listening this evening to News-night a minister said she was awaiting a report from Price Water-house concerning the internal systems following the loss of the discs. Why on earth should such remote people be brought in at this stage and at enormous cost when we have highly paid civil service managers whose job it should be to report the facts regarding this occurrence. It is an absolute disgrace that a senior minister should even dare at this stage to quote such gobbledygook as Price Water-house ! What on earth civil servants paid for if when anything goes wrong they are not allowed to report on the matter before external quangos are brought in

Government spokesperson on Newsnight: 'We must learn the lessons and put in place safeguards that will ensure this will never happen again'

Me(shouting at telly): WOT, LIKE YOU DID AFTER THE 15,000 RECORDS WENT MISSING LAST MONTH?

These Labour, so called 'Parliamentarians', are incompetant to an 'n'th degree and are clearly unsuitable to be in charge of the Nation. They cannot be allowed to run a Government, either now or
ever again. These relativists, have always been an accident waiting to happen.

They under the tutorledge of Jack 'Heinrich' Straw, dismantled the last vestiges of the permanent sanction, 'the Death Penalty', for terrorists and traitors; opening the door to Islamic terrorism, which, guess what, would impose the same for being even an Homeosexual.

One of the problems of relativism is that no one at the top actually pays for inappropriately running, 'whatever', or doing wrong, or terminal greed. Managing Directors, bosses at all sorts of levels are allowed to negotiate terminal bonuses of millions of Pounds, while those who cannot rent reasonably, are forced to engineer/adapt their applications for obtaining a Mortgage, which becomes granted at penal rates; consequentially creating the current Banking crises, after the cyclical progress of the known capitalist crisis; every ten to fifteen years, forces up interest rates. The poor pay whether it be the third world or the rich western society. However, private ownership does breed responsibility.

We need a dose of 'liberal' puritanical efficiency, which is favourably tolerant but tough.

Jane Kennedy fatuously bleats that she wants to learn how to deal with data security issues. (While conveniently not addressing her depertment's sidelining of reports covering exactly that learning..)

Me, I'd like to be a Nobel laureate, and to start a company that would rival Google..

Unfortunately for both of us, we are just too stupid. At least I recognise these limitations, and don't seek to harm 60-odd million other people with my misconceptions..

It's just the same old Brownist story? Goprdo thinks he's cleverer than everyone, so wants to centralise everything, so he controls it all..

Despite evidence to the contrary (of which there is much) we might cede him the point that he's cleverer than anyone.. This still leaves him several tens of millions of times stupider than everyone else combined, with 'everyone else' concentrating on knowing about their own specialisation..

He's too ignorant to be allowed to continue doing damage..

What is this about 'the government' refunding everyone? 'The Government' has no money; you and I have money, and the Government extorts it, through a mechanism they call 'taxation'.

I think it's about time for MPs, ministers, and P.M.'s to take personal responsibility.. We should be able to sue them, personally, for their blatant uncaring failures..

Brown and Darling would be bankrupted by this, and we'd be well rid of them...

(eh. Politicians could buy liability insurance, just like anyone else who makes decisions that affect large numbers of people..)

Why aren't these morons answerable?

The minister put up to speak tonight about the security lapse was not equipped for the job. She clearly has no idea about data security. She claimed that things would be better in future, because more modern systems are being introduced into government. Hardware and software was not the issue in this security lapse - or in many of the earlier ones. It was a system failure of the other kind: they had implemented no secure processes. The fact the a naive worker could copy 25 million personal records onto CD and mail them shows a complete lack of basic management.

These sorts of failure often occur in organizations where inexperienced staff have more practical and technical knowledge than their masters, but not enough experience to understand the dangers of what they can do.

Does anyone care whether Mr Bland or Mr Dull wins the Lib Dem leadership?

Vince Cable has been doing a great job, of lashing into the Govt and the opposition, with incisive points that neither can answer. That's what the leadership candidates need to be able to do, and is exactly what the lib dem election process has prevented..

They should each be given a week as trial leader, in the commons, so their performance can be assessed. Forget this gentlemanly sniping on Newsnight; that's wholly irrelevant...

Security is top down and it starts with policy. Policy is the responsibility of those at the very top. It is they who decide who gets sccess. Policy in turn drives behaviours. What we are seeing is not a simple systemic failure. The government does not seem to have a policy and following on from that a data security plan and a working infrastructure to support it. Therefore we should be very concerned. It will take a strong change program and some time to fix this.

The professor Anderson an expert in computer security from Cambridge university has given us valuable clues about government behaviour vis a vis data security.

Thank you for having him on the programme.

Why don't you get him on again when more details of the case come out, and he can give us more of his expert views on the subject.

It's a pity the government fails to take any notice of true experts and intellectuals who have worthwhile knowledge in specialised fields. The case of Iraq was obviously the same - the government decided it was going to do something and rides roughshod over expert opinion which presents an obstacle to it's preset course. Inevitably the outcome is disastrous for all concerned.

It wouldn't surprsise me if, somewhere in a cave on the Afgahn/Pakistan border,bin Laden is packing his beach towel and shades and heading for the beach. Who needs al Quaida when all an international terrorist needs to do is sit back and wait for our secure data bases to implode?
If I were him I would be relishing the imposition of identity cards. Once the system is in place all he will need to do is find some willing 13 year old hacker to take the whole thing apart.
Why, when criminals match and exploit every technolgical advance, do ministers continue to insist that ID cards will increase our security? All it will do is lock all our data up in one place. Difficult to gain access to initially, but, as with all high-threshold systems, once breached everything will be laid bare.
Within months there will be be people walking our streets with fake cards that are impossible to distinguish from the real ones.

There are many electronic and physical means to ensure security of information. The use of standard delivery of such sensitive data is clearly an issue that such an eventuality should not have been possible without significant criminal planning by sophisticated fraudsters. This is the twenty first century, not the dark ages. This however was a rudimentary error made by an individual who saw nothing wrong in what they were doing as part of governmental operations. Without an alternative method being at their disposal as clearly defined policy and procedure and the support of a dedicated data security expert to consult, sufficient measures commensurate to the sensitivity of the data was failed to be utilised. Digital Rights Management technology is now available to prevent unauthorised copying of data. Encryprion of data with the most robust of algorithms such as AES should surely have been used for transmission of any personal data. Software in use by government agencies should have included these such technologies in order to prevent such a blunder. Instead, poor software is in use without proper data structure, allowing unrestricted access of vast quantities of personal data available without restriction to any employee. It will be some sort of miracle if this such personal information is not and has not been used for fraudulent purposes.

So is this to be another incident of illegal governing by an illegitimate government created from an unelected prime minister. For once, Europe is our last hope. The European Union has the power to take action against such avoidable mismanagement.

'Security' is defined (www.dictionary.com) as :

1. freedom from danger, risk, etc.; safety.
2. freedom from care, anxiety, or doubt; well-founded confidence.
3. something that secures or makes safe; protection; defense.
4. freedom from financial cares or from want: The insurance policy gave the family security.
5. precautions taken to guard against crime, attack, sabotage, espionage, etc.: The senator claimed security was lax and potential enemies know our plans.
6. a department or organization responsible for protection or safety: He called security when he spotted the intruder.
7. protection or precautions taken against escape; custody: The dangerous criminal was placed under maximum security.
8. an assurance; guarantee.
9. Law.
a. something given or deposited as surety for the fulfillment of a promise or an obligation, the payment of a debt, etc.
b. one who becomes surety for another.
10. an evidence of debt or of property, as a bond or a certificate of stock.
11. Usually, securities. stocks and bonds.
12. Archaic. overconfidence; cockiness.

So what security do we have in Britain. On the grounds of 1., freedoms are being restricted for 'security'. On the grounds of 2., well there is certainly a lack of care of our elderly. 3., military budgets have been cut, impairing 'security'. 4., security of families are being sacrificed and breaking up through forcing parents to pursue financial 'security' to pay their debts. 5., criminals are let out of jail to further crimes. 6., there are so many immigrants in the UK, they can't even be counted. Figures have varied four fold from 300,000 to 1,200,000, and revealed actual figures continue to rise. Is this good for 'security' ? 7., See 5. 8., How many failed promises do you want ? From Iraq to Referendums, not a form of 'security' you should trust. 9., Debt, yes, not a founding pillar of 'security'. 10., Yes, evidence of debt, and property if you're lucky enough to have swindled someone foolish enough to lend you the money for the 'security' you can't afford. 11., Security for Venture Capitalists for sure. Otherwise your security is penalised by ever higher capital gains tax. 12., maybe this is the problem, a clunking fist is supposed to provide 'security'.

These really are dire straits. This illegitimate government is a disease on the people of Britain. They need to go. Never has there been such an incompetent government claiming to provide 'security', instead, in a political masterpiece of hypocrisy, security is now the one thing that is lacking the most in Britain. This is not the first politic to provide such weak attainment of its stated objectives. It is reminiscent of a familiar politic. The politic of fascism.

I think i have said it before and i am gonna say it here again. We are governed by low level hacks who could not tie up their own shoe laces without putting a target on it, getting consultants involved, dismissing all reasonable practices and procedures offered from experts, then buggering up the whole shoe lacing process....jesus! are we governed by hillbillies or what?..and what price is it going to be to secure the safe return of a couple of disc with data on them?.. if YOU have these discs(by accident of course,"they came through my letterbox mr police officer; honest") get yourself a good PR man.. can i suggest Max Clifford, you'll make a bundle...yeah lets turn this into a circus and laugh at our leaders incompetance yet again; that list just gets longer and longer doesn't it just.

Data security lapse. Is there more?
Security and disaster recovery - business continuity, are tightly coupled. If the security policy is in dissaray then the continuity plan is also suspect.
What happens to benefits payments when the systems go down?

The Conservatives began wrecking the Civil Service departments in the 1980s and New Labour continued the process as they too believe in Anarchism not Statism.

Given that New Labour has had ample advice about the sine qua non for 'Transformational Government' (good data integrity/security in government requires good IT users, just as good data/evidence in science requires good researchers) but has airbrushed this warning repeatedly, what must any rational person conclude other than that they are engineering this in furtherance of their Anarchist/Anarcho-Capitalist/New Left-Trotskyite agenda? Once they have the public accepting that the Home Office (IND, Prison Service, Probation Srvice especially viz NOMS, C-NOMIS and The Offender Management Act 2007), Treasury, NHS.

Take the recently spilit DfES. Note all of the counter-evidential Lysenkoist initiatives such as 'Aiming High', 'SureStart', 'SEAL' These don't work and may just make matters worse, brand schools/teachers as 'unwitting racists' or just incompetent teachers where the race card can't be played, putting more schools into Special Measures so that they can be 're-developed'. This way, departments can be said to be 'not fit for purpose', and then safely fragmented, putting more of the state out to New Labour's Private and Third Sectors backers in the interest of 'efficiency' whilst claiming that they're doing what's right for the public ('Parent Power'. the Patient's Charter' etc). These are rich pickings for some at the expense of the nation, but then, the latter's not long for this world under the EU Reform Treaty, and the nation doesn't see that this is all happening VIA New Labour's policies (and those of the Socialist Intrnational elsewhere).

The French see Sarkozy trying to do this and are belatedly standing up to him. We've on the other hand have been been voting for it one way or the other since at least 1979.

/blogs/newsnight/2007/11/tuesdays_prospects.html
/blogs/newsnight/2007/11/tuesdays_prospects.html

Finally, Northern Rock - is this all woeful deja vu for Derek Wanless, or a case of 'job well done'?

Surely the concern about these discs being lost is that it shows there could be other occasions when information could be downloaded and sold without anyone knowing about it. This is much more sinister.

Interesting on data protection. Years ago I was in the business and indeed helped write the original 1984 Act. A couple of ideas from an old [in both senses]computer man.

Don't blame the Information Commissioner. He has only a few tools to use starting with non criminal Enforcement Notices. The real problem is that the current Act which replaced the 1984 Act tries to do too much as usual in deference to the EU which likes to goldplate everything. The 1984 Act was diligently discussed by MPs in Committe [I was there for every session] and deliberately kept it as simple as possible. It was effective and folows the Council of Europe guidelines which are a de facto standard accepted by eg the US and Australia and suitable for world wide use. You don't have to be a boss-eyed eurosceptic to suggest that telling Brussels to jump in the lake and going back to the 1984 Act would result in the really essential work being done at less cost with fewer foul ups.

Second what ever happened to the CCTA which was manned by civil service managers who like me had grown up with computers and kept a pretty decent eye on government systems until it disappeared into the bosom of Government Commerce. What's it doing now?

Last the professor is quite right about big data bases getting out of control. As they say of the elephant, the bigger the organisation the bigger the b***s and all eth gigabytes in the world won't save you.

John Parfitt

There is now a yawning gap opening between the technology-friendly members of society and those who are not, and I include the government in the second category.

Jane Kennedy's 'performance' last night was a complete disgrace, as not only did she demonstrate a total ignorance of the technical issues involved, but adopted the blithe attitude that 'the mistakes will be learned from' etc. Well sorry, but these kind of mistakes are only made once, and then it's over. You cannot fix this by 'learning from mistakes'.

HM Government appears to be crumbling under the weight of its own technological infrastructure, and whilst this may be funny in the short-term, it does not bode well for the long-term.

Of course, it does suggest that the more tech-savvy members of the public could probably beging to take over certain sections of government without them even realising!

Ed (#44) Looked at another way, what if that's their backers' agenda?

Why would anyone think that our greatest hope lay in their achieving their objective, unless they were one of them?

Apologies, pre-edit posted at #40.

The Conservatives began wrecking the Civil Service departments in the 1980s and New Labour continued the process as they too believe in Anarchism not Statism.

Given that New Labour has had ample advice about the sine qua non for 'Transformational Government' (good data integrity/security in government requires good IT users, just as good data/evidence in science requires good researchers) but has airbrushed this warning repeatedly, what must any rational person conclude other than that they are engineering this in furtherance of their Anarchist/Anarcho-Capitalist/New Left-Trotskyite Worker's Democratic agenda? Once they have the public accepting that the Home Office (IND, Prison Service & Probation Service especially viz NOMS, C-NOMIS and The Offender Management Act 2007), Treasury, NHS, surely their job is well on the way to being done?

Take the recently split DfES. Note all of the counter-evidential Lysenkoist initiatives such as 'Aiming High', 'SureStart', 'SEAL' These don't work (see the data) and may just make matters worse through branding schools/teachers 'unwitting racists' or just incompetent teachers where the race card can't be played, putting more schools into Special Measures so that they can be 're-developed'. This way, departments can be said to be 'not fit for purpose', and then safely fragmented, putting more of the state out to New Labour's Private and Third Sectors backers in the interest of 'efficiency' whilst claiming that they're doing what's right for the public ('Parent Power', the Patient's Charter'). But this has all the hallmarks of the 'Shock Therapy' fiasco. How CAN the general public know what's best for them in professional areas, especially if that sector is being progressively dumbed down through dysgenesis? This was Ian Smith's point surely? From another perspective, there are certainly rich pickings to be had for some at the expense of the nation, but then, we are led to believe that the latter's not long for this world under the EU Reform Treaty, and most of the nation doesn't appear to see that this is all happening VIA New Labour's policies (and those of the Socialist International elsewhere).

Hopefully, the French see Sarkozy trying to do this and are belatedly standing up to him. We on the other hand (rather like turkeys), seem to have been voting for our nation's demise since 1979 at least.

/blogs/newsnight/2007/11/tuesdays_prospects.html
/blogs/newsnight/2007/11/tuesdays_prospects.html

Finally, Northern Rock - is this all woeful deja vu for Derek Wanless, or a case of 'job well done'?

Well done in having Prof. Ross Anderson on Newsnight. He clearly explained how the philosophy behind centralising computer data is fundamentally flawed. It cannot be fixed.
Please have him on again.
Can we also have the same approach to the banking system. It is also based on deeply flawed philosophy; the immoral and,in the past, illegal practice of usury.

I am 52 and have always had an enquiring mind. My old headmaster, the late, great R.F. MacKenzie told us to question everything.
When browsing youtube a few months ago I came across a video that was continuously being removed, so I had to follow the clues. I got to the following on Google video,
"Zeitgeist the movie part 3"
"The Money Masters"
"Money as Debt" (the most concise)
"America: from Freedom to Fascism"

Nobody teaches this stuff and you will see why if you watch concise "Money as Debt."

So now I know after all this time.
And that makes me feel good.
The poor polititians are puppets of the international bankers who have plans for us all.
And it isn't good.

Hello, i believe in freedom and i am ginger