Installation of the program Humanity has failed. Too many corrupt sectors. Would you like to format and try again?
Only if their act also jeopardizes peopleās lives. But good news! You basically canāt make a public policy decision without jeopardizing someoneās life (seriously, you canāt) so terrorists all.
Youāre right. And Iām not saying he was in any way guilty or that the detention was legal. But that appears to have been the justification for the detention.
The SO of a journalist is a menace? Please, explain.
Not sure if itās the sectors, or the code. We need it engineered and debugged, no matter what, or sooner or later, weāre going to generate the wrong fatal error and end up with a Planetary Blue Screen of Death. . .
1 Like
Please let this interpretation of the law mean that tactical counter terrorism teams will be rounding up all the clipboard muggers downtown here.
That could be said of anyone, when facts and evidence are not an issue.
Any kind of political involvement is a crime. Looks like they really intend to dismantle democracy (or what remains of it).
Well, of course; heās giving love and comfort to the enemy. [/sarcasm]
Welcome to Britain. Donāt think of us as a clapped out deindustrialised has-been with a lousy climate; instead think of us as a living, breathing theme park dedicated to the memory of George Orwell.
3 Likes
Not really. The Labour Party are even more in love with surveillance than the current lot of stasiesque spivs. Miliband and Cooper have been almost entirely silent on this issue for a good reason.
Indeed, in fact Miranda is such a menace that they released him without charge and allowed him to leave the country.
Perhaps theyāre trying to confuse him into confessing something?
2 Likes
It seems to me that disclosing the truth to promote a political or ideological cause is called politics, and also journalism, which are also within the British definition of terrorism, according to this report.
Tangential-to-topic-at-hand: Happened upon an old news article in the BBC today, āBlair tells MPs their phones wonāt be tappedā:
Tony Blair has avoided a potential row with backbench MPs by deciding to preserve the longstanding convention that their telephones should not be tapped by the security and intelligence agencies.
By law, MI5, MI6, GCHQ, and the police have to apply to ministers for warrants to intercept phones, emails, and faxes on the basis of threats to national security, or to fight serrious crime.How quaint. The article calls it a "longstanding convention" not to tap the phones of these officials, and this was in 2006. Which makes me wonder* if any of these programs would ever see the light of day without a Snowden or Ellis whistleblower.
*Not reallyāI already know the answer. Especially when the chair of the U.S. House Intelligence Committee is saying stupid things like this:
āYou canāt have your privacy violated if you donāt know your privacy is being violated.ā
I believe this is the part where I drop the mic.
1 Like
Labour might not get an absolute majority; in fact, thatās a likely scenario. A Lab/Green/whateverisleftofLibDem government could give some hope of reverting these policies. Not that Iām counting on it, but thereās a chance.
So basically what he is saying (if Iāve been following this issue correctly) is that the MPās can rest assured that their phones are tapped, their email is intercepted, and itās going to stay that way.
ā¦using powers intended to allow the detention of people suspected of connections to terrorism.
I totally read that the first time as
ā¦using powers intended to allow the detention of people suspected of confections of terrorism.
ā¦And then I read this!
** āā¦the disclosure or threat of disclosure is designed to influence a government, and is made for the purpose of promoting a political or ideological cause. This therefore falls within the definition of terrorism.ā**
Ye gods, man! This is it!
Here we are in an Orwellian nightmare. It has come to pass.
Well, if we actually cared about any of Orwellās opinions, that would be fine. Weād have a lovely place to live. This is more in line with Stalin orGoebbelsā notions than Orwells.
A landslide for the Greens would be nice, but Iām not holding my breath.
