[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On 26/06/13 09:48, Neil Stone wrote: > On 06/26/13 05:30, Kai Hendry wrote: >> After seeing http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23049737 with GCHQ's >> Cornwall outpost I was wondering what other DCLUG members thought >> about the revelations that pretty much all our activites on the >> Internet are watched without due process. >> >> Are we comfortable with that? >> >> Seems like most people have gone into resigned acceptance mode (or >> they knew it all along) instead of writing to your MP mode and try to >> curtail it. >> > If you have nothing to hide, why worry ? > I agree, I was under the impression they were more interested in who communicates with whom, rather than the content of the communications. I think this cropped up when Abu Quatada was re-arrested for communicating out side of his bail or release terms (I don't have full info), And this is I assume when they DO have permission to intercept / monitor communications. It seems odd that MI5 et al were watching the killer of Lee RIgby and failed to act, but the police et -al jumped at the chance to arrest someone for sending a birthday greeting via facebook, the latter is hardly a matter for national security, (granted there were communication restrictions) if they had acted in the former then the killing may have been prevented, like wise in the US the Boston bombers were on the rader and for all the expertise and big boy stuff, the authorities failed to prevent the bombing. Maybe even in the case of the Maths teacher running off with a pupil people knew , people failed (incompetent) and the what happened could have been prevented, look at Oxford, Rochdale child abuse cases and other scandles, more examples of useless over paid, over qualified jobsworths not doing their job properly and worryingly not being sacked which would at least scare their associates in doing their job properly It seems the people charged with protecting us are not doing that, to a level we should expect, but what are our expectations. Given the recent border agency they do not even know who is in the country, So going back to what Neil said is fine, but it seems the threat level you pose is indirectly proportional to the ability to keep track of you. Then when you have MP's who think google is the Internet and can just block porn with a switch is it any wonder, when it comes to child porn especially surely we should be stopping the abuse (see above) as blocking it does not stop people abusing. but that would require people to ohh get off their fat backsides and investigate people properly, we can't have the police enforcing the law against real criminals can we, it's much easier to go after joe bloggs driving 1mph over the speed limit or Mrs Smith not paying council tax (which people have withheld as they object to police time being used for the driving offense i just mentioned) Surely if the police et al want our co-operation they need to trust us, and treat us with a bit more respect. If GCHQ / NSA are acting outside the law, this needs to be investigated otherwise court cases could be put at risk if a defense lawyer asks for evidence that due process was followed, this could be VERY dangerous, not only for the rest of us but for any witnesses. Paul -- -- http://www.zleap.net http://www.linkedin.com/pub/paul-sutton/36/595/911 I am committed to safeguarding children, young people and vulnerable groups and expect any school or establishment I am involved with to share this commitment. -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq