The Surveillance Society
Cameron the Chief Controller
Is Dave starting his search through the Nation's emails?
The government's proposed Communications Data Bill, following as it does, the granny tax, the fuel fiasco, the pasty farce, has proven beyond reasonable doubt the complete incompetence of Dave's mediocre cabinet. Their desire for this 'snooper's charter,' proves conclusively, how out of touch with public opinion this bunch of nincompoops have truly become.
The latest policy initiative to emerge from Cameron, May and their barmy cronies, is to monitor everyone's electronic communications. This is not only one of Dave's daftest initiatives, it's also one of his most undemocratic.
It has already been pointed out by people far wiser than Dave, that if you're searching for a needle in a haystack, it doesn't help to make the haystack bigger.
The police, are naturally very keen to obtain these new powers. This is not surprising, but it should worry every citizen who believes that privacy, liberty and freedom of speech are the marks of a civilised society. Our forebears fought and died to uphold such rights. Freedom from intrusive monitoring by the state. is a precious freedom indeed and is not one we should have to battle with our own elected government to preserve.
There is of course, a very serious point to be made here, and that is, in a democratic and civilised society, governments should be monitored by the people and not the people monitored by the government.
To use the erroneous and fatuous argument that we'd all be better protected from terrorists, paedophiles and perverts, if only all our personal emails, website visits, on-line purchases, facebook postings, twitter messages, texts, voicemails and phone conversations were continually monitored by the government, is not simply disingenuous, it is also false.
We cannot ensure the security, freedom and liberty of the people by extinguishing the very principles which guarantee their existence.
It's interesting to quote Cameron's response when Labour tried (unsuccessfully) to introduce a similar snooper's charter. He claimed the government were using: "scare tactics to herd more disempowered citizens into the clutches of officialdom, as people surrender more and more information about their lives, giving the state more and more powers over their lives. If we want to stop the state controlling us, we must confront the surveillance state."
What's changed Dave? If you opposed it then, you should oppose it now. Otherwise, 'the people' might just conclude you can't be trusted with the reins of power.
If this bill proceeds in anything like its present form, the citizens of the UK will be among the most monitored on earth, up there with the peoples of Iran and North Korea. Quite a result for a government which would like us to believe it values liberty and freedom.
It's depressing, but perhaps not surprising, that politicians' clear commitment to high principle, is much more evident when in opposition, than when in power.
Note to readers: Your views are welcome. Please click on the comments tab below to record your opinion. Thanks for visiting 'Irascible Isights' James Rainsford.
The police, are naturally very keen to obtain these new powers. This is not surprising, but it should worry every citizen who believes that privacy, liberty and freedom of speech are the marks of a civilised society. Our forebears fought and died to uphold such rights. Freedom from intrusive monitoring by the state. is a precious freedom indeed and is not one we should have to battle with our own elected government to preserve.
There is of course, a very serious point to be made here, and that is, in a democratic and civilised society, governments should be monitored by the people and not the people monitored by the government.
To use the erroneous and fatuous argument that we'd all be better protected from terrorists, paedophiles and perverts, if only all our personal emails, website visits, on-line purchases, facebook postings, twitter messages, texts, voicemails and phone conversations were continually monitored by the government, is not simply disingenuous, it is also false.
We cannot ensure the security, freedom and liberty of the people by extinguishing the very principles which guarantee their existence.
It's interesting to quote Cameron's response when Labour tried (unsuccessfully) to introduce a similar snooper's charter. He claimed the government were using: "scare tactics to herd more disempowered citizens into the clutches of officialdom, as people surrender more and more information about their lives, giving the state more and more powers over their lives. If we want to stop the state controlling us, we must confront the surveillance state."
What's changed Dave? If you opposed it then, you should oppose it now. Otherwise, 'the people' might just conclude you can't be trusted with the reins of power.
If this bill proceeds in anything like its present form, the citizens of the UK will be among the most monitored on earth, up there with the peoples of Iran and North Korea. Quite a result for a government which would like us to believe it values liberty and freedom.
It's depressing, but perhaps not surprising, that politicians' clear commitment to high principle, is much more evident when in opposition, than when in power.
Note to readers: Your views are welcome. Please click on the comments tab below to record your opinion. Thanks for visiting 'Irascible Isights' James Rainsford.
