Highlandladdie Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 This comes up every time a terrorist sneezes - the security services and the Home Office have been after extended powers for years. What the powers actually mean is the equivalent of opening all your postal mail for checking before it it's delivered. The talking heads spout the usual "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" non-sequitur, and imply, or even state explicitly, that anyone opposing the extension of monitoring is a terrorist sympathizer. They forget to mention that anyone with reasonable knowledge would be able to circumvent the surveillance anyway - the dark web exists, despite all efforts to the contrary - but function creep would soon mean council officials monitoring your email to check on benefit entitlement, or school eligibility. Sorry guys, but civil liberties are hard won, and once relinquished, are almost impossible to get back. Mr Franklin's quote is most apposite here: "Those who would sacrifice essential liberties in exchange for security, will end up with neither". Spot on.... Not to take anything away from the individuals that have lost their lives but today, who are the real terrorists? We have been told over and over again via the news and prominent politicians that threat level in the UK is severe. This in itself inciting fear among the populous. After all the definition of terrorism is :-The use of violence or the threat of violence, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political goals. So how much of a threat is terrorism really? Is it as dangerous as catching a flight? Or driving to work? To me, what Cameron et al is proposing just seems like a smash and grab at our liberty. An interesting paradox, where according to Cameron etc, in order to be free you must give up freedom. Almost like new sort of totalitarian regime. 1984 indeed....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosd Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 Spot on.... Not to take anything away from the individuals that have lost their lives but today, who are the real terrorists? We have been told over and over again via the news and prominent politicians that threat level in the UK is severe. This in itself inciting fear among the populous. After all the definition of terrorism is :-The use of violence or the threat of violence, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political goals. So how much of a threat is terrorism really? Is it as dangerous as catching a flight? Or driving to work? To me, what Cameron et al is proposing just seems like a smash and grab at our liberty. An interesting paradox, where according to Cameron etc, in order to be free you must give up freedom. Almost like new sort of totalitarian regime. 1984 indeed....... How much more proof do you actually need to realise the threat is real? This isn't "the bogey man" we're talking about, obviously bombings, shootings, abduction, beheading isn't enough!! Wow! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lloyd90 Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 "Nothing to hide , nothing to fear" As you have nothing to hide you wouldn't mind people listening to your phone calls ? Opening your letters ? Checking your bank statements ? Going through your house and personal possessions ? Putting camera and audio equipment in your home to see what your upto ? After all ... you've got nothing to hide... surely if your law abiding then your not against any of this ?! *Please note the sarcasm!!* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamster Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 How much more proof do you actually need to realise the threat is real? This isn't "the bogey man" we're talking about, obviously bombings, shootings, abduction, beheading isn't enough!! Wow! They already had the trash on radar, what would more powers have achieved ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadeye18 Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 "Nothing to hide , nothing to fear" As you have nothing to hide you wouldn't mind people listening to your phone calls ? Opening your letters ? Checking your bank statements ? Going through your house and personal possessions ? Putting camera and audio equipment in your home to see what your upto ? After all ... you've got nothing to hide... surely if your law abiding then your not against any of this ?! *Please note the sarcasm!!* you forgot being microchipped like a dog. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosd Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 "Nothing to hide , nothing to fear" As you have nothing to hide you wouldn't mind people listening to your phone calls ? Opening your letters ? Checking your bank statements ? Going through your house and personal possessions ? Putting camera and audio equipment in your home to see what your upto ? After all ... you've got nothing to hide... surely if your law abiding then your not against any of this ?! *Please note the sarcasm!!* If this was aimed at me, no I have nothing to hide.... Your avatar possibly suggests you do! *Please note the sarcasm!!* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lloyd90 Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 If this was aimed at me, no I have nothing to hide.... Your avatar possibly suggests you do! *Please note the sarcasm!!* It wasn't particularly aimed at anyone. Its a worrying thought though. I have no criminal record or commit any crimes, never been in trouble etc etc etc ... I still don't want my privacy violated. Its a slippery slope and frankly the measures won't do much to stop radicalism and terrorism, it will just affect the ordinary person, allowing the people in charge to keep better tabs on us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 you forgot being microchipped like a dog. Not a bad idea , we might have a bit of a clue how many are here and more to the point who they actually are. KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosd Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 It wasn't particularly aimed at anyone. Its a worrying thought though. I have no criminal record or commit any crimes, never been in trouble etc etc etc ... I still don't want my privacy violated. Its a slippery slope and frankly the measures won't do much to stop radicalism and terrorism, it will just affect the ordinary person, allowing the people in charge to keep better tabs on us. I was winding you up by the way I appreciate what you're saying, and I for one am not saying this will fix the problem, but if it helps toward fighting the problem then as said I'm for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadeye18 Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I know this is off thread but wheres steppenwolf dissapeared to.thought this topic would be right up his street!its nice to see some new contributors popping up in a few threads here n there lately though as ive not been on here long and its nearly always the same people contributing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) I know this is off thread but wheres steppenwolf dissapeared to.thought this topic would be right up his street!its nice to see some new contributors popping up in a few threads here n there lately though as ive not been on here long and its nearly always the same people contributing. Edited January 13, 2015 by kdubya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 The thing is that all of your e-mails would probably be stored ad-infinitum. In the future, if something happens (not necessarily terrorism, because lets be realistic - eventually it will be expanded to everything, including how your insurance premiums are calculated) - an automated heuristic will categorise you based on your past 20 years of e-mail, and other communications, and round up 'suspects' based purely on an algorithm. If you think this is paranoia - these same algorithms are being employed right now on the likes of Facebook and Google to target advertising to you. Having a snoopers charter is all fine and well, but it will not deter the determined terrorist. It doesn't take a genius any more to write code which can obfuscate covert messages. The only people who will be inconvenienced are the law abiding. Likewise there needs to be oversight and CRIMINAL charges for people who misuse this data. But - when was the last time you saw a policeman or the CPS go to jail for lying or misrepresenting in court? This is a bit like gun licensing laws - who do they inconvenience? Only the law abiding. Can't argue with any of that. Good post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 They can read all my emails and texts, thats no problem to me. The only problem they might have is I will trip all the keyword detectors with words like rifle, gun, bullet etc. Don't be nieve, its happening already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FalconFN Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 Let them look,lives are at stake Can get come round and look through your wife's knicker drawer? I'm sure she had nothing to hide either but we relinquish our privacy at a cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaniel Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 Totally agree!! Can I also add that we talk about "freedom" or "equality", but when we look at people like these gunmen or these hate clerics, how many of us think they deserve freedom, equality or the ability to exercise their human rights? I think most people would say they don't deserve any of this. Unfortunately, like anything in life, the minority spoil it for the majority, and if this is a case where I have to give up my freedom to stop others abusing theirs then I'm willing to do that. Totally agree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesj Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 As with many things if the laws that are in place were used then there would be no need for new ones! just look at Dunblane. As I understand it if the information that was at hand had been acted one it might not have happened Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHOOTEMUP Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 This comes up every time a terrorist sneezes - the security services and the Home Office have been after extended powers for years. What the powers actually mean is the equivalent of opening all your postal mail for checking before it it's delivered. The talking heads spout the usual "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" non-sequitur, and imply, or even state explicitly, that anyone opposing the extension of monitoring is a terrorist sympathizer. They forget to mention that anyone with reasonable knowledge would be able to circumvent the surveillance anyway - the dark web exists, despite all efforts to the contrary - but function creep would soon mean council officials monitoring your email to check on benefit entitlement, or school eligibility. Sorry guys, but civil liberties are hard won, and once relinquished, are almost impossible to get back. Mr Franklin's quote is most apposite here: "Those who would sacrifice essential liberties in exchange for security, will end up with neither". Very well said I wouldn't trust any of em because before long they will allow this access to anyone they like Don't trust the ******** Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westley Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) The security services will monitor people they want to monitor using every conceivable electronic or conventional means available, they don't ask permission for that. What we are witnessing is more window dressing than of any real use in combatting terrorism, it IS a worry though in terms of curtailing ordinary peoples freedoms, stealth big brother dressed in preserving safety clothes in other words. Well, I for one will not be the least bit concerned ! Edited January 13, 2015 by Westley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanj Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 This comes up every time a terrorist sneezes - the security services and the Home Office have been after extended powers for years. What the powers actually mean is the equivalent of opening all your postal mail for checking before it it's delivered. The talking heads spout the usual "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" non-sequitur, and imply, or even state explicitly, that anyone opposing the extension of monitoring is a terrorist sympathizer. They forget to mention that anyone with reasonable knowledge would be able to circumvent the surveillance anyway - the dark web exists, despite all efforts to the contrary - but function creep would soon mean council officials monitoring your email to check on benefit entitlement, or school eligibility. Sorry guys, but civil liberties are hard won, and once relinquished, are almost impossible to get back. Mr Franklin's quote is most apposite here: "Those who would sacrifice essential liberties in exchange for security, will end up with neither". couldnt agree more. nothing to hide nothing to fear is just lazy logic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timps Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 The problem as I see it is not the actual looking at emails that is causing the political fall out it's the encryption side of it that is causing the problem. If MI5 want to read facebook messenger, IMessage, Skype and pigeon watch personal messenger etc. they cannot because they cannot crack the encryption designed to protect users from hackers. This would mean legislation forcing the providers of these services to hand over the keys which they are not going to do. The press release of "Excuse me dear users of the world, regardless of where you are the British government can eaves drop on you as we have given them the encryption key" will not go down well world wide. So the potential problem is companies like Skype stop providing their services in the UK hence the concern sensible politicians have with some parts of the proposed legislation. We all know how good the government is at drafting legislation and the fear is badly written legislation screws up encrypted communication in the UK and makes us a 3rd world country in e commerce. My 16 year old is doing computer programming and he really hopes it doesn't go through because of this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pegasus bridge Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I think the government should grasp the nettle, and stop making everyone endure the pain equally, profile those "likley" to become terrorists and deal with them. Instead of sending our troops abroad, we should utilise them in Britain to tackle the cancer within. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fisherman Mike Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I have a friend who works for GCHQ in Cheltenham.... You wouldn't believe what they can do already and do ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cant hit rabbits 123 Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 'Nothing to hide, nothing to fear' is a dangerous line to follow. History has repeatedly shown such paths to be disastrous. Post war Germany, late 20's early 30's, the SA made efforts to intrude into private information. This continued when the National Socialist party came to power, to seek out the 'terrorists' of their day. The SA, and later SS and Gestapo had pretty much free reign to search, confiscate from and detain people for anything the government deemed dangerous. I do believe we all know the outcome. But remember, that government was democratically elected to save and protect the country, and was allowed by its people to take such measures in the name of national security. Just because the government that is in now probably won't go a little do-lally and become rather unpleasant doesn't mean the next one wont. UKIP is on the rise, they might take it a step further and start searching for people they believe shouldn't be in the country and interring them. Who might come after them? Who's to say the next lot won't be even worse? Who's to say they won't start to target you, your friends, your family because they deem you dangerous to the state. What if they were targeting you with powers you voted to give them? I'm all for the intelligence services being given the tools and support to fight those who would do us harm, but not at the cost of our future freedom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortune Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 The security services will monitor people they want to monitor using every conceivable electronic or conventional means available, they don't ask permission for that. What we are witnessing is more window dressing than of any real use in combatting terrorism, it IS a worry though in terms of curtailing ordinary peoples freedoms, stealth big brother dressed in preserving safety clothes in other words. Here's the thing, it's all very well saying 'you've nothing to fear if you've nothing to hide' - that is until someone in power in the future decides that they don't like what you're saying/thinking/doing and changes the law. Don't think it hasn't happened because it has. A small example would be the views of a few members on here which contravene the Equality Act. Might seem an odd example and you might not like it but it's (currently) the law. Imagine that writ large. The problem with the erosion of civil liberties is that as they drip drip away many people hardly notice. They don't as a rule ever return. Drip, drip, drip......and for what? How does the quote go ? A Governemnt which sacrifices a little freedom for a little security will get neither, and deserve neither, or something like that. All those involved in the Charlie Hebdo shootings were well known to French security services and featured highly on their radar, didn't they? Didn't work too well there. Spot on.... Not to take anything away from the individuals that have lost their lives but today, who are the real terrorists? We have been told over and over again via the news and prominent politicians that threat level in the UK is severe. This in itself inciting fear among the populous. After all the definition of terrorism is :-The use of violence or the threat of violence, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political goals. So how much of a threat is terrorism really? Is it as dangerous as catching a flight? Or driving to work? To me, what Cameron et al is proposing just seems like a smash and grab at our liberty. An interesting paradox, where according to Cameron etc, in order to be free you must give up freedom. Almost like new sort of totalitarian regime. 1984 indeed....... "Nothing to hide , nothing to fear" As you have nothing to hide you wouldn't mind people listening to your phone calls ? Opening your letters ? Checking your bank statements ? Going through your house and personal possessions ? Putting camera and audio equipment in your home to see what your upto ? After all ... you've got nothing to hide... surely if your law abiding then your not against any of this ?! *Please note the sarcasm!!* As with many things if the laws that are in place were used then there would be no need for new ones! just look at Dunblane. As I understand it if the information that was at hand had been acted one it might not have happened A lot of truth in the above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aris Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I have a friend who works for GCHQ in Cheltenham.... You wouldn't believe what they can do already and do ! And he told you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.