1. "Dirty Data" is to expected from this government. Here the probation union, NAPO, says that Home office data is incorrect which is being used to make changes in the Home Office's Probation Service operations. I've watched the faking of everything connected with me by any number of departments of government including the NHS, police, tenant management and presumably the Home Office who is responsible for the police, Special Branch and the intelligence services. "Dirty Data" is the standard in my direct experience. It creates image management gloss enabling those in charge to project a hunky dory image while attacking the person who reports the truth in order to discredit it with the use of surveillance technology.
People who do not have the ability to do a job properly fake it in order to make themselves look good. This is especially true in management where the power exists to manufacture data and outcomes as well as coverup the fraud. There is a massive effort to do this in my direct experience with regard to using the surveillance technology against me for the past eight years and four months 24/7 as a tool to "fake it."
The data is so dirty here that its release will rock any resemblance to and reliability from objectivity, accuracy and credibility to its very foundation. There will no longer be any trust in government or what its people are doing when the extent of this abuse becomes general public knowledge. That is why such a massive effort is being carried out agains me to cover up this massive hoax by any means possible especially attempted murder or fabricating mental health illness.
One of the key points made in the article below is that the government's own data is contradictory. An open debate is most certainly essential here given the Home Office's propensity to "dysfunction" and be "unfit for purpose." In my case only a full inquiry with complete judicial powers will be effective in disclosing the massive hoax which has been perpetuated for all these years against me including a most extensive abuse of power. I am looking forward to such an inquiry which can only be inevitable given all that has happened for such a long time which is completely contrary to all that this country represents or claims to represent.
BBC News
Probation data flawed, says union
 The union says re-offending is lower than the Home Office suggests |
The probation union, NAPO, says Home Secretary John Reid has used "flawed" data to justify privatising the Probation Service.
NAPO said only 53% of people on probation re-offended within two years - not 60% as the Home Office said.
The government plans to privatise the Probation Service in a bid to improve its much-criticised performance.
The Home Office said it wanted the best provider - whether public, private or voluntary - to help stop reoffending.
The National Association of Probation Officers said the government's own "unadjusted" figures showed re-offending was less than Mr Reid said.
Assistant general secretary Harry Fletcher said reoffending by those on community sentences was at least 13% lower than those released from jail.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6217619.stm
2. And, possibly dirty coppers at the top in Norfolk. After eight years and four months of 24/7 surveillance with police presence and notification for years about the abuse of power and corruption, it comes as no surprise for me to read something like this. The failures of the police to enforce the law properly and get it right reveal a very deep seated corruption indeed which has not even been addressed in London. This is why the terrorist succeeded in London in July 2005.
BBC News Saturday, 30 December 2006, 16:42 GMT
Police chiefs probed over conduct
A chief constable and several senior officers from a police force are being investigated over allegations about their conduct.
An independent inquiry is under way into allegations about the behaviour of Carole Howlett, who retired as Norfolk's chief constable at Christmas.
Also under scrutiny are the force's deputy chief constable, assistant chief constable and other officers.
Two former officers raised concerns in letters to Norfolk Police Authority.