Shroud waver waves shroud shokka.
Britons must accept a greater loss of digital freedoms in return for greater safety from serious criminals and terrorists in the internet age, according to the country’s top law enforcement officer.
Keith Bristow, director general of the National Crime Agency, said in an interview with the Guardian that it would be necessary to win public consent for new powers to monitor data about emails and phone calls.
Fuck off!
Sigh…
Benjamin Franklin will be spinning in his grave.
Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.
How many times? How many fucking times must it be said? No, we do not need to trade liberty for security. No we do not need to allow these authoritarian scumbags more powers to snoop on us, no we do not need their protection from the bogeymen. What we need is for them to do some old-fashioned policing; not to snoop on the innocent and not to give up our liberties. Fuck off!
Once again, I wholeheartedly agree with everything you say, so any comment from me would be but repetition.
To paraphrase King Henry, “Will no-one rid us of these turbulent parasites?”
I think only WE can Ted, and not through the ballot box either……
As my long dead father in law used to say – “it’ll take guns on the streets.” Trouble is, they took all the guns away.
As they always wanted to do:- and for precisely that reason.
Hungerford, Dunblane inter alia merely gave them the excuse they wanted, cynically dressed up as “Think of the children” for mass consumption.
Doesn’t accord witrh the agenda to fuck off. Their whole raison d’etre is to be there to interfere.
It makes perfect sense to them because the powers that be are using Orwells 1984 as a manual not a warning, we are now into the phase where they follow it step by step.
So of course they want to snoop more it’s all about fear and control after all.
“Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” – Louis D. Brandeis
One of the first moves into the removal of evidence or trial being required to find “guilt” is the speed camera. Once thought of (and heavily sold on this presumption) as protection against the young racers careering round urban streets, they are now just a way of increasing the government’s income, and to allow them to slap a record on the otherwise innocent. All that is needed is the production of a document carrying two photographs, each labelled as from different cameras, neither of which needs to have any identification as to where they are located, with totally unidentifiable backgrounds, and accompanied by a bit of blurb about what information is also on the document – even if the blurb and/or the information is totally wrong! Of course, none of this matters to the police – they have issued the summons, and it is now up to you to contest (at great cost) or accept your guilt. Most will meekly accept, many not realising quite what they are doing.
“Guilt” is now a presumption in more and more situations; to be charged of “racism” means that you are racist (but only if you are white – if you are not, then your accuser must be); accuse a man as being a paedo, and – lo! – he is, and can never prove otherwise, as, well, he is, else he wouldn’t have been accused (such is the circuitous logic). Once accused, it is up to you to prove your innocence, which you cannot do as you are guilty. The world is truly going mad.
You know, it strikes me that these pronouncements for yet more control are driven by the hapless and hopeless who need to grow a pair before venturing out onto the jolly old Interweb. Specifically the Waah! He’s being howwid to me mommy! Stop him, stop him, stop him! response to small minded little trolls (I think we all know what kind of person we’re talking about here.) The trick is not to feed the little sods. Or the trolls.
Now they’re talking about jail time for ‘revenge porn’? Well if people weren’t such thoughtless exhibitionists in the first place, there wouldn’t be the material to post, would there? Heavy sigh. Even in this Farcebok age, there are facets of life best kept unshared and offline.
It should be enough to retort with the simple argument that the mass monitoring, harvesting, storing and data mining of almost 70 million people in a democracy cannot be in any way argued as a proportionate response to the terror threat of at best a few thousand, but in addition consider:
1) That the “security services” including the Police already have these powers, provided they go to court and obtain a warrant.
2) That even where terrorists are actually known to them, they do precisely nothing about it, as proven most vividly by Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale – the men who butchered Lee Rigby.
3) That it is now known that during the past dozen years or so that GCHQ have routinely lied to Ministers, Parliamentary committees and the public about thier use of interception and storage in contravention of the existing law.
4) That the Police have shown themselves equally untrustworthy by the revelation this week of thier conniving through the use of PACE powers to “hack” journalists’ phones for no better purpose than uncovering media sources who were causing the Police discomfort in the press.
The population needs to wake up and fight this. Too few people seem to actually care that thier few remaining freedoms are about to be stolen from them