Blogoir: January

My previous whimsical posting has prompted several pertinent comments leading me to this marvellous site: 419 Eater.

I now know more about this scam industry - much of it (but not all) originating in Africa - than is healthy.

Some of the exchanges between Scambaiters and the would-be scammers intended to trick the scammers into wasting their time are very fine. See the reverse Harry Potter trick (producing many real pages of laborious scammer handwriting) and Derek Trotter's wife (he wishes...).

As a reader points out, the IT needed to generate all those zany email introductions may not be especially clever:

... the only thing they need is a program ('spider') to gather some e-mail addresses from all around the web. Then they just put hundreds of Nigerians in front of their PCs in gloomy internet cafes and start the operation. In order to steal the money they must engage in a lengthy e-mail exchange and the response rate is minimal.

Perhaps that is why scammers do not hire people speaking English - multiplying even a modest rate by the number of different messages, the profits do not cover the expenses (I think).

Sounds about right. And recalls the clever explanation in Freakonomics of why in fact most drug dealers are poor:

In other words, a crack gang works pretty much like the standard capitalist enterprise: you have to be near the top of the pyramid to make a big wage. Notwithstanding the leadership's rhetoric about the family nature of the business, the gang's wages are about as skewed as wages in corporate America. A foot soldier had plenty in common with a McDonald's burger flipper or a Wal-Mart shelf stocker...

... Which means that you stand a greater chance of dying while dealing crack in a Chicago housing project than you do while sitting on death row in Texas. So if crack dealing is the most dangerous job in America, and if the salary is only $3.30 an hour, why on earth would anyone take such a job?

Maybe in the event I was wrong on the core point. A well-written elegant scam letter would not be convincing to most people as a potentially plausible human-interest hard luck story from Africa.

Hmm. It all comes down to marketing. I happen to be put off by excessively poor English. If they want to communicate with me, they need to do their research better! So there.

Or at least show the prolific imagination and even sheer wit exemplified in the Viagra spam emails which Gmail so wonderfully separates out for me, of the Amaze her with your Mighty Wonder-snake variety.

Writing those email leads could employ me rather well. How does one get into that line of work? Suggestions?

A reader writes that this blog is interesting but sometimes too opinionated and very conservative.

Hmm.

Is she saying that it would be improved if it was more opinionated and very conservative all the time - 'sometimes' is just not good enough?

Or that it would be better if I was much more even-handed in a post-modern media way, striking a studious unopinionated balance between Right and Wrong, Honest and Dishonest, Truth and Lies?

What do you all think?

I'll investigate adding one of those fun opinion poll meters so we can get a definitive majority view.

The main technical problem with killing someone for personal gain is not getting caught.

Here's a plan.

The target hosts tea for a worthy, clever and believable sucker. The target's shattered body is found soon afterwards, when you + sucker have obviously been somewhere else. How could he have been killed in that short gap? Certainly not by you. 

Scatter confusion and contradictory leads in all directions, including linking the whole business to mysterious killings in a cathedral a couple of hundred years earlier, with a touch of gayness for extra spice.

Welcome to the astonishing imagination of Charles Palliser.

An enticing new business opportunity arrives in my Inbox:

Dearest One,

My late father deposited 6.5millon dollars in finance company hear in Cote d'lvory, before he die, for on-word transfer aborad through diplomatic cargo for investment purpose,
 
This is an a confidential matter to be delt with carefulness to enable us understand more better with the fund to be a benefit to every one, Or if it can'nt be possible for the trip here, We can negotiate at any nearby country to come with this fund with all proves as a withness for the vital truth behind the stories and with the fund.If you are willing to assist me send to me your full datas  or your informations so that i will submit it to the finance company for them to contact you...

The people propagating this sort of thing must invest quite a lot of money in the IT needed to spread the messages around the planet. Yet, twits as they are, they see no need even to run a basic SpellCheck to make the messages minimally credible.

The real business opportunity here lies in improving the spelling, grammar and presentation of African spam/con artists.

I have replied in that sense.

Former UK Ambassador at the UN Sir Jeremy Greenstock has caused a stir with his various observations on the BBC about Hamas - summary here by Paul Waugh.

In the vast noise the Israel/Palestine/Gaza/Hamas generates it is next to impossible to keep any discussion coherent. See any Comments thread after any article anywhere on the matter.

One way of looking at the Greenstock line of argument is to try to break it down to some more manageable first principle issues of Diplomatic Technique:

• are Hamas really as ghastly as they seem to be?
• one way or the other, are they people to whom (for better or worse) we should all be talking? 
• is Israel's latest military action making a difficult situation far worse, including for itself?

Melanie Phillips swipes pretty convincingly at the argument that the Hamas charter is mainly 'rhetorical'. Methinks FCO Arabists do no-one a favour (above all the Palestinians) by playing down the quasi-Nazi roots and language of these people.

As for talking to Hamas, odious or not, the trouble with not talking to powerful determined people is that you normally end up doing so, not necessarily strengthened by all the years of perching on a smug policy high horse which did not take you anywhere useful. See eg the EU now lamely opting for more 'dialogue' with Belarus, after years of getting nowhere through 'isolating' the Belarus regime.

And in any case it is wise policy to divide and rule, and to drive wedges - to aim to peel off the moderate extremists (such as they are) from the extreme extremists and total psychopaths. 

For the average extremist, life is simple. It often pays to create new levels of complexity for them - to give them new things to think about and more subtle choices to make. Engagement does that rather well, if done craftily. And saying so does not make you insane, or a tool of the extremists. 

But craftily means craftily. Giving a lead (or, worse, predominant) role to extremists totally demoralises moderates and encourages a 'the worse we behave, the more we get' tendency - exactly the wrong incentive structure. See eg the policy incoherence which characterised a lot of the Clinton/Holbrooke and wider Western method of dealing with devil-we-know Milosevic in the 1990s.

Is Israel making a bad situation worse?

That again depends where you start and what you want. This powerful piece by Daniel Finkelstein captures something important:

... the gas chambers, the concentration camps, the attempt to wipe Jews from the face of the Earth, they aren't ancient history, and they aren't fable. They happened to real people and they happened in our lifetime. Anne and Margot Frank were just children to my aunt and my mother; they weren't icons, or symbols of anything.

The second is that world opinion weeps now for Anne Frank. But world opinion did not save her.

The origin of the state of Israel is not religion or nationalism, it is the experience of oppression and murder, the fear of total annihilation and the bitter conclusion that world opinion could not be relied upon to protect the Jews...  

That of course does not explain away all sorts of Israeli mistakes and misdeeds down the decades.

But a small country in which almost every person has had numerous relatives murdered in one or other genocide is going to have a different view of what makes sense 'in the long run' - especially when the strategic problems are increasingly unconventional. And agonisingly difficult.

The line quoted at the top of this Blog is lifted from a telegram I sent to the FCO in 2005 about the commemorations of the Liberation of Auschwitz.

It's one thing to exclaim impatiently that the Jews should now 'move on' and get over it.

Another to stand in the camp for four hours in sub-zero temperatures to watch world leaders in turn pay homage to the remaining group of elderly Auschwitz survivors, wrapped in blankets which helped a bit with the snow but could not shield them from the frozen horror of their memories. And later, in 2006, to see a German Pope visit Auschwitz and try to find the right words of contrition, perhaps not quite successfully.

Impenetrable blackness indeed.

Gulp.

The British economy is declining at a frightening rate.

Not quite everywhere. A friend who runs a business not far from here selling mass-produced medical widgets here and overseas says that profits are soaring as the cheaper pound both boosts exports and makes money earned overseas worth even more in pound terms here. A lot of this extra loot is expected to go back into the business to improve productivity and create more wealth.

His message: "a wonderful time to be in British manufacturing".

Suz Blog in a less than chirpy frame of mind hosts this week's Roundup, leading with various bloggers enthusing over  anti-Israel protests here in the UK.

She links to Craig Murray's latest book. Craig himself has been busy on the anti-Israel demonstration trail:

I do not believe in Israel's right to exist. It is a militarised, evil entity founded on a racist premise and a lot of religious hokum.

That lively formulation might apply to a number of countries - should they be denied the 'right to exist' too?

I was reminded today of the famous, nay unique occasion back in August 2003 when a sizeable group of Newcastle United suporters were hosted at the British Ambassador's residence in Belgrade.

What happened was this.

Newcastle United FC were in town to play a Champions League qualifying match against Partizan Belgrade. A group of supporters - maybe 200 maximum - had travelled to Serbia for the game.

When English soccer fans travel overseas, a complex problem-prevention operation begins, linking up the local and UK police authorities, the clubs, the supporters' organisations and the nearest British diplomatic mission who have responsibility for 'consular' work if trouble ensues.

In this case for what was (in the great scheme of things) a fairly low-key but important match in sleepy mid-August, the usual plans had been set up. The Embassy consular team were on the case.

We at home were in the throes of packing up our belongings, as my posting came to an end in a few days' time.

The telephone rang. The Embassy consular officer asked me to come to the hotel in central Belgrade where a large group of Newcastle fans were being 'held' by the local police before the match.

I arrived. The problem was that the Belgrade police were determined to have no incidents involving English fans, so they had bottled them up in a shabby stifling hotel to wait some eight hours for the game. The fans were not being allowed out into the city, and (not surprisingly) were getting ... restive.

I remonstrated unsuccessfully with the senior police officer present. He checked with HQ: Orders were Orders. They had to stay where they were.

As it looked more than likely that a ridiculous punch-up would soon ensue, I had an idea. To invite the mass of fans to my house where they could sit on the grass in the sunshine for a couple of hours, before going to the nearby stadium.

The police, hopelessly outmanoeuvred by this ingenious proposal, saw no reason to argue. I telephoned home: "200 English football supporters will be arriving in about 30 minutes. Crack open beers and find bread en masse for cheese rolls!"

Thus we had a most enjoyable afternoon as I tried to pick my way through unfamiliar hi-end Geordie accents and the fans telephoned home to tell their mates and families about their unexpected and genial Embassy hosts:

The next couple of hours rank amongst the most remarkable pre-match drink ups that toon travellers have ever enjoyed, fans relaxing against a backdrop of well -manicured lawns and a swimming pool. 

Unfortunately the Pimms was in short supply, but to compensate, copious amounts of local lager and Boddingtons were dished out of large ice-filled bowls by servants, while others circulated with bowls of crisps and plates piled high with pastries.

And while all of this was going on, our former captors the local constabulary stood glaring at us through the railings, the Embassy grounds of course being off limits to them.

Newcastle won a desultory game 1-0 but were knocked out on penalties in the return match.

Is this what Embassies are supposed to do in such cases?

Not exactly.

But as Ambassador I had the privilege of living in a large house in Belgrade to represent UK taxpayers, so as and when some of those taxpayers needed a helping hand in my view they should get it.

And at least the ever-courteous Serbs did not ceremoniously murder any chickens to make a crude half-time gesture.

I have not added anything on this important subject, as my earlier posting in December said more or less all I have to say on it.

This time the Russians have played hardball, actually letting people all over the place get very cold by turning off gas supplies.

The accounting arrangements for gas and other energy supplies as between Ukraine and Russia are likely to be pretty impenetrable - it suits many people to keep it that way.

So to some extent this gas drama is simply different factions of post-Soviet Energy Oligarchs thumping each other for passing amusement, with the general public as collateral damage.

That said, I wonder whether Russia will regret making this move?

Ukrainians who otherwise might have inclined towards the Moscow view of the post-Soviet space must be unimpressed at the fact that Moscow turned off their gas tap.  

And the arrival of EU experts to monitor the flow of supplies - ostensibly to check that neither Russia nor Ukraine is cheating - gives Western standards new foot-holds and insight deep in former Soviet power arrangements.

A good example of where the bland, inoffensive, soft power EU really is more effective than the sum of its parts? Hard to imagine either Russians or Ukrainians accepting eg German or French or Austrian monitors in their national capacities?

Exporting something like reasonable and transparent arrangements back up Europe's energy pipelines has been a major objective for Western policy since the Cold War ended. Will we be able to use this new development to make a new sustained push in this direction?

If so, excellent.

Update: Or not?

PJ O'Rourke starts at a canter (h/t Instapundit):

Is it too soon to talk about the failed Obama presidency just because Obama isn't president yet?

Accelerates:

Bringing the government in to run Wall Street is like saying, "Dad burned dinner, let's get the dog to cook."

And ends at a gallop:

Is Obama the man who can make the wolf of partisan spoils dwell with the lamb of public interest, and the leopard of increased political power lie down with the kid of individual liberty; and the calf of personal responsibility and the young lion of social engineering and the fatling of free enterprise together; and a lawyer from Hyde Park will lead them?

What a sentence.

Caps doffed all round.

A deft and interesting Observation on The Old Curiosity Shop by David Frum.

A pleasure to read someone who loves books and ideas sharing his thoughts with the rest of us, without truculent ideology or any obvious 'angle'.

I have had a Palm for years, virtually problem-free. They work by doing the basics in an easy, stable way.

Now this new device is coming our way. Looks good.

Further feisty observations on Evolution from a reader:

Let's make a simplified projection based on those two coexisting and interdependent groups (while acknowledging there are other groups and factors at play):

• One group, those on modest working incomes have chosen not to have children (or as a group to have fewer children) because of economic constraints. 
• The other group, those on welfare, see their economic circumstances improve as they have more children and evidence shows they make the equally rational decision to have more children.

The former dwindling group contribute to a large degree to the welfare payments of the latter growing group and it will not be long, as you say, before the whole giant Ponzi scheme collapses into a stinking heap.

The government (and by extension the voters who voted for them) have decided they value the latter group more than the former group and want more of them as, from an evolutionary perspective, those having the desirable characteristic will increase in number within the population while those without the desirable characteristic will decrease within the population over time...

A reader chides me for using the word teleological in a posting about evolution, saying that such vocabulary is a terrible turn-off for some people..

I stand duly chid. Or even chidden. But is he right?

The word of course is in frequent use in and around the pubs where we live. It comes from the two Ancient Greek words tele (meaning TV) and logos (meaning that if it is on TV it must be true and therefore fairly logical).

Anyone who doesn't know this basic linguistic fact should not be reading this website anyway, and indeed probably can not do so.

All this reminds me of the evening when I was FCO Resident Clerk and the cheery switchboard operator told me that there was a call from Uruguay on the line: "it's from Monty-video".

Jermain Defoe goes back to Tottenham Hotspur FC.

Let's have a bit more of this, please:

Craig Murray is busy drumming up interest in his new book about dirty dealings in Africa.

He has chosen some supposedly good quotes from this text to help this effort. What do his readers think about them?

Many of them are so blindingly silly and/or vulgar that they will do his cause little good, I suspect.

I pick out only two which are of some professional interest to me:

Thousands of senior British diplomats, civil servants and members of the military knew of our policy of acceptance of torture.

Thousands? Who are these people? How senior? If we are talking (generously) about First Secretary/Colonel level and above as 'senior', how many does UK public life have in the foreign policy area broadly defined? What exactly did they 'know'?

Diplomats rather pride themselves on not caring.

Fatheads rather pride themselves on being witty.

A reader adds a gloss on my earlier observations on Evolution:

... one extra point might be made, just to protect against hubris in evolutionists, who seem for the most part to have an unfailing belief in the perfectibility of man. .

You write of breeding schemes producing 'better animals'. Better for whom? I ask this because Darwin insisted on using the word 'progression' rather than 'progress'. Is it not possible that there are also some negative 'progressions' in man's continuing evolution?

Good point.

It is hard in this area to find the language to avoid teleological nuances - the idea that there is underlying natural 'purpose' out there. Even the phrase 'natural selection' conveys an idea that someone or something is effecting the act of selecting - choosing between possible options and outcomes.

But are we edging towards new scientific discoveries which start to throw disconcerting new light on how personality characteristics of different communities are, in fact, really different? That some 'ethnic groups' are, for example, indeed more aggressive or docile or even clever or lazy than others?

And that these character traits, for better or worse, are not down to eg 'colonialism' or sexism, but rather to genetics?

Thus:

Skin color has no moral significance, but traits that led to Darwinian success in one of the many new niches and occupations of Holocene life — traits such as collectivism, clannishness, aggressiveness, docility, or the ability to delay gratification — are often seen as virtues or vices.

Virtues are acquired slowly, by practice within a cultural context, but the discovery that there might be ethnically-linked genetic variations in the ease with which people can acquire specific virtues is — and this is my prediction — going to be a "game changing" scientific event.

That should be interesting.

Another reader points out that she and her partner have chosen not to have children, as they just can not afford it: is this somehow a reprehensible decision?

Of course not.

It's just that in the way of things, societies/communities (more 'conservative' as some might see it?) which favour having families as an end in itself probably will tend to replace those who treat children as a lifestyle/economic option of some sort.

Plus who generates the money to pay our pensions in a couple of decades' time as the West's Pension Ponzi Schemes run out of road?

A good and subtle Middle East piece in the Times by David Aaronovitch who (I seem to recall) had a Tough Left reputation at Oxford when I was there in the early 1970s but now offers deft analysis.

He swipes aside a now modish comparison between Israel and the Nazi villains who perpetrated the Warsaw Ghetto massacres, pointing out that Israel would need to have murdered some 500,000 Palestinians to achieve that level of wickedness:

So why the philistine insistence on this particular match? Partly, I imagine, so that the matcher can mention the “irony” of Jews supposedly doing to others what the Nazis “did to them” - as if there weren't a thousand other closer, but far less narratively satisfying, comparisons.

He makes a deep point on Responsibility:

When 13.75 million German voters put their cross against the overtly Jew-hating National Socialist list in July 1932, didn't they make themselves complicit in the events that ended up with Hanna's choice? Or, to put it another way, couldn't people that you might fall in love with, be capable - depending on the circumstances, created by millions of others - of doing terrible things?

This is another way of posing the question of the Exception - or not - of Evil.

To be continued.

For ever?

The latest round-up is here. Liberal England genially hosts.

The Roundup feminist entries seem to my admittedly less than sympathethic eye unrelentingly cross and strangely limited in their cultural 'reach', as if only current Western female angst counted.

See eg this agitated one by Me and My Army on body hair, disgustingness (or not) of.

I note only that an African friend of mine from Ghana once told me that in his part of the world men and women alike shave armpits for aesthetic regions.

Have spent most of the morning grappling with online and other HM Government services.

Thus we can not enroll for Corporation Tax services until we have had our registered company address changed. This problem arises because the soon-to-be-mighty global corporation CGC reSolutions Ltd took over another defunct company. The registered address for us at Companies House is fine. But the CT system has the old address.

Changing the old address to the new one turns out to be difficult. The tax office at the number given online and by a Helpdesk did not pick up the telephone after my holding for nine minutes. So I have had to write to them.  

Meanwhile I have been trying to extract a state pension forecast from the online system, but that does not work because (I think) our current address does not correspond with the myriad Foreign Office addresses we have had down the years. So after spending ten minutes waiting for them to answer the telephone, I now have to wait two weeks for a written forecast by post.

Sigh.

The Information Function is very difficult for governments with well established legacy systems. Moving an official process or organisation to a new secure technology is complex enough in itself anyway (remember the Tubes?). Plus the large public out there are all whirring around at different stages of life and differing abilities to engage with the system as it is, let alone a snazzy new one.

The new online services seem to work well enough when one has navigated one's way to final registration and made a careful note of all the different code numbers and passwords one needs. BUt what a faff achieving that.

Another exercise has been calling Microsoft to complain about the fact that the letters on our new Curved Keyboard are wearing away after only a few weeks' use. Eventually I got through to a series of helpdesks somewhere in the deeper part of the Himalayas. I think they promised to get me a new one, but I am not sure.

Complexity. It will be the downfall of us all.