You won't dignify it with a response.
Yet you want an unpoliced internet.
That is why it is policed. To stop horrid things like that.
Printable View
Credit to you for not writing the line, 'if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.' But that's the angle you're coming from. I'll go with whistleblower Edward Snowden's assertion that British snoops are even more invasive than their Yank counterparts and that Tempora is real and more powerful than Prism.
Free speech, absolute free speech, has never existed. I'm not going to answer stuff directed at Splott Dai as he's able to articulate his own opinions, plus I don't wish to humour your delusions that he and I are the same person.
I used to hate the idea of my emails being watched, but I couldn't really give a toss. I even email the occasional thing that is likely to get highlighted so that they can read my nonsense emails.
But it is true. As it is there is nowt to bother yourselves with. And I know the point is more where its heading. What will they do in the future. They wont be arsed to make sure everyone is moving to the same beat. Playing the same tune.
Yes it has been abused already. I remember reading that a council used some snooping powers they had to try and prove that someone didn't live where they said they did to get a place in a school. And the more they are used the matter of fact it can become. We do need people watching out for our civil liberties. But we dont all need to be worrying about it like some think we should be. For a start life is simply too bloody short to not be living your life, and instead wasting it worrying about being watched.
Councils use (misuse) RIPA, The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. There's scarier ones than that on the statute book, namely The Civil Contingencies Act 2004, the equivalent of the Patriot Act in the USA (which, incidentally, must have been written before 9-11 given its length at over one million words).
It's heading for blanket facial and gait and walking recognition cameras in urban areas and drones covering the countryside. All for our safety and protection, of course.
Most crimes are committed in private homes, it would be logical then for the state to install them inside addresses using any number of pretences. The nothing to hide/fear maxim would be employed. I suppose the ultimate aim is to microchip everyone to track their movements. Gradualism's been the name of the game. We can only hope they are in no hurry to implement the Mark of the Beast.
I agree about not worrying about what might happen. Nevertheless, I think it's prudent to make some provisions. The German government seem to think so too. The link below is from today.
Germans told to 'stockpile food and water' in civil defence plan - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...ood-and-water/
So dozens of posts and no actual examples of where our freedoms have got worse comparable to the 70s.
Come on can we have some solids examples of where the average person has less freedom.
I read rumours on various sites that the USA may be handing over ICANN numbers to countries not so liberal regarding freedoms, get ready for the internet kill switch!!!
For the benefit of yourself and Baz, I gave you examples with those TV shows. You're likely both too young to remember them. You're certainly too idle to do the tiniest bit of research or view just a few minutes of the episodes on Youtube otherwise you'd have a clue.
I'll save you boys the bother... I was on about political correctness. The leading character in those shows were fond of referring to black people as coons and nig-nogs. The irony is those characters were drawn for viewers to laugh at their ignorance. But it turned out that a substantial number couldn't figure it out for themselves and heartily agreed with their racist views and absurd narrowmindedness of general life.