immac
Senior Member Has-Been
The Investigatory Powers Bill
I know I am cynical about the base motives of politicians, and love a conspiracy theory, no matter how off the wall, but is it just coincidence that in the week preceding the discussion of the new Investigatory Powers Bill we are told about "significant chatter" alerting spooks to possibility of another attack?
We have seen governments do this before: Blaire famously parked tanks on the lawns outside Heathrow Airport just as they were running into trouble with a similar Bill, and as soon as the vote was won, the tanks went home.
We are now being told that it is essential that everyone in UK has all their internet activity freely available to police for up to a year - although to get to the real data they will need a court order - so no protection at all there. Britain truly is a Police State, but how much more intrusive can they get?
So, to shut up the opposition, we are presented with a real and present danger that shows just why we (you - I don´t live there) should trust them with everything we do: security trumps privacy.
Nazi, Joseph Goebbels, is credited with the "Nothing to hide, Nothing to fear" argument, which is almost impossible to defend without looking guilty.
Are we being duped again?
Ian
We have seen governments do this before: Blaire famously parked tanks on the lawns outside Heathrow Airport just as they were running into trouble with a similar Bill, and as soon as the vote was won, the tanks went home.
We are now being told that it is essential that everyone in UK has all their internet activity freely available to police for up to a year - although to get to the real data they will need a court order - so no protection at all there. Britain truly is a Police State, but how much more intrusive can they get?
So, to shut up the opposition, we are presented with a real and present danger that shows just why we (you - I don´t live there) should trust them with everything we do: security trumps privacy.
Nazi, Joseph Goebbels, is credited with the "Nothing to hide, Nothing to fear" argument, which is almost impossible to defend without looking guilty.
Are we being duped again?
Ian