UK - The real BIG brother
Miscellaneous Forums/General Discussion/UK - The real BIG brother
I really hate the muppets who are in charge of the UK at times.
Butch of absolute paranoid twits who believe they need to keep tabs on every citizen all in the cause of fighting terrorism
http://www.computeractive.co.uk/computeractive/news/2227591/government-plans-super-databaseHell they cannot safeguard ANY personal data at the moment. Heaven knows where all this recorded phone call, email, and surfing data will end up!!!!
What are your feelings on gun control?
Heaven knows where all this recorded phone call, email, and surfing data will end up!!!!
On the next train to Brighton ?
What are your feelings on gun control?
We don't want guns. We've got enough problems with knives.
You deserve everything you get then.
This is actually old news, however I suggest that from now on we should all place a stray "bomb", "gun", "knife", "kill", "murder", "Jihad", "terrorism", "supremacy" or suchlike word (or better still words) in every text or email we send. They won't know whether they are coming or going and soon give up on this nonsensical waste of public money.
We have freedom of speech except we don't? I'm pretty sure that would be against the EU human rights act policy, with invasion of privacy laws definitely being broken.
You deserve everything you get then.
I do?
And what's that, exactly?
We've got guns but it's hard to get a license, you either have to be a farmer or in a gun club. Shooting anyone will get you locked up.
We have freedom of speech except we don't?
What has Freedom of speech got to do with anything? Freedom of Speech guarantees that you can speak, it doesn't guarantee no one will listen.
I'm pretty sure that would be against the EU human rights act policy, with invasion of privacy laws definitely being broken.
I doubt it does, but that's not my concern here. My concern is that - if there's any truth to this - our security services could be lulled into wasting their time sifting through completely and utterly unmanageable quantities of data that they can therefore make no practical use of. They already have the legal right and ability to intercept transmissions when they have some kind of information to go on. I can't imagine why they would want access to vast mountains of data without that initial lead, because without it, there's no way to make it useful.
Going on past legislation in this field, of course, they probably don't want it.
> Shooting anyone will get you locked up.
The Injustice of it all!!!
The main problem here is that 'terrorism' is always used as a reason to bring in ever increasing amounts of surveillance. If it actually stops a major plot by the bad guys to cause mayhem then fair play
Just how long will they retain your data for too?
Could this data be sold on to third parties such as insurance companies if you ever make a big claim for example?
For me the fact that our personal data seems to be massively insecure really bothers me. The government will be giving it away on a free CD attached to cornflake boxes soon
Guns wouldn't work in britain. Your not allowed to attack intruders even with a bat to defend your home, you'll have NO chance with a gun.
Mind you, in london/manchester, the criminals and gangs are running around with them already.
It's the laws that need to change, not what you defend your home with.
It's all as Jim says. You'll go for a loan and the banks/insurances companies will come up with a wealth of options to knock you back, or charge you extra because of your browsing habits, or people you talk to on your phone.
And what's that, exactly?
Less chances of a gunshot, I guess...
Lets allow guns so we can endup a big out of control f-up like the usa!!
Well the people in the US (and I suspect most elsewhere) who end up shooting people tend to never get their firearms legally. Those of us who do legally obtain them have more respect for people and life in general.
Guns won't help you in the street and I really don't think it's a good idea to be allowed to carry in public, but should be allowed for defending your home. Here in California very few people seem to carry guns in public. I've only seen them on maybe 4 or 5 occasions in the past 10 years, and permits to carry concealed weapons seem to be quite rare. Might be different in other states.
As for the rest, I'm glad that I left the UK 10 years ago, the place has really changed, and definitely for the worst. As far as free speech goes, it only seems to work so long as your in a vocal but racial minority, preferably a disgruntled islamic fundamentalist, in which case the government will go out of its way to appease you, so maybe you will play nice. Even allowing you to introduce your own sharia law courts and further segregate your society.
Hope something can be done soon.
Personally if ya want to carry guns thats not a problem but I would make each bullet cost £50,000 at least you would have to have a bloody good reason to shoot someone.
These days this kind of thing is just a cover for a bigger plan. This movie is pretty informative - watch the original full movie first then the addendum - both free at this site:
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/ Guns wouldn't work in britain. Your not allowed to attack intruders even with a bat to defend your home, you'll have NO chance with a gun
Wow I didn't know that. What do you do just sit back and watch them take your stuff? Personally I would just rather hit them on the head with a bat.
As for the rest, I'm glad that I left the UK 10 years ago, the place has really changed, and definitely for the worst. As far as free speech goes, it only seems to work so long as your in a vocal but racial minority, preferably a disgruntled islamic fundamentalist, in which case the government will go out of its way to appease you, so maybe you will play nice. Even allowing you to introduce your own sharia law courts and further segregate your society.
Certainly has turned into a real dive, we may not even be allowed an xmas tree this year at work, im too not bothered about it just the reasons behind not having one. Really is unfair when one group can express their ways and another is forced back on theirs, especially when they are civil and fair.
You do realise that the term Big Brother is from the George Orwell novel "1984" which is a scathing attack on the UK all the way back in 1948. So yes the UK government is quite literally Big Brother.
And what's that, exactly?
Fewer bystanders struck down by random gunfire? Fewer "illegal" guns in the hands of criminals?
I doubt it does, but that's not my concern here. My concern is that - if there's any truth to this - our security services could be lulled into wasting their time sifting through completely and utterly unmanageable quantities of data that they can therefore make no practical use of.
More importantly it's technically impossible. A friend of mine works for one of the largest ISPs in Denmark (but not the largest). Now of a population of only 5 million people, of which probably 800.000 have Internet connections, and the ISP he works for has maybe 20% of that market, and they log less than 1% of the total traffic. They log more than 12 TB of data every day. Imagine the storage requirements for an ISP like BT, if they had to log absolutely everything?
The main problem here is that 'terrorism' is always used as a reason to bring in ever increasing amounts of surveillance.
Don't forget pedophiles!
Those of us who do legally obtain them have more respect for people and life in general.
Sure. But most of the guns (in the US) that end up in the criminals hands, were originally bought legally, and then stolen.
Besides, I don't really think having a gun is likely to encourage the government to spend LESS spying on you.
As proposed the system cannot work. Any half-clued up criminal already uses encrypted communications, now under UK law you must provide the government with your PGP key if asked.
However stealthily reading your emails to identify you as the next pilot of a badly parked 747 isn't going to be to stealthy when an MI6 agent knocks on your door asking for your PGP key.
Therefore, clearly, by design this system does not do what it sets out to do, so one must wonder what the real purpose is? Quite obviously, it's for data-mining: Knowledge is power.
In the history of all nations nothing good has ever come from a government seeking to extend the power that has been granted them. In this case I can see how analytics could be used to construct intelligent models of the mood of the nation, for instance to deliver palattable sound bites in the run up to election time.
Firstly, UK is a member of the Echelon project along with the US, Canada and others. Which means, this is to a big degree happening today. :( Other countries, such a Norway where I live, bend over backwards to please the US and make information available to Echelon without being members.
A similar law was passed in Sweden recently, but it only applied to data traffic in and out of Sweden. This, of course, is a silly limitation, since most data traffic will be crossing borders anyway. It has caused many companies, like Google, to remove all the servers they had in Sweden.
As for gun control, it doesn't really enter into the equation. What are you going to do with your guns if the government is listening in on your phone calls and spying on your surfing. Shoot them?
Guns help greatly - for instance, when the time comes to shoot the scum who enslave us with their arcane financial trickery...not to mention when they start dragging 'troublesome' people away for 'terrorism' and the like...or disrespecting the dead, or racism, or holocaust denial etc..
Don't see how a gun will help, when your getting charged for gunning down 3 policeman, and you get life in prison. :o)
I get your point though.
I don't think the UK government will be happy until we are all implanted with chips and have 2D barcodes tatooed to our foreheads
Oops .. more encouragement. Hope they are not reading this thread(!)
Remember though, this has NOTHING to do with terrorism .. everything to do with mass data collection on individuals for various agencies to wallow in
Firstly, UK is a member of the Echelon project along with the US, Canada and others. Which means, this is to a big degree happening today.
Echelon is largely used for Industrial Espionage, and only works across satellite links. with more and more traffic being routed across fiber optic and copper links, ECHELON is more or less useless these days.
Guns help greatly - for instance, when the time comes to shoot the scum who enslave us with their arcane financial trickery.
What kind of gun exactly? I mean if you're going to go up against a M1 Abrams, a B2 Stealth bomber with "new-killer" payloads or an AH-64 Apache helicopter gunship, you're gonna have to have one mean gun. Even the Iraqi Insurgents don't have a fighting chance, and they have military grade explosives and RPGs!
What kind of gun exactly? I mean if you're going to go up against a M1 Abrams, a B2 Stealth bomber with "new-killer" payloads or an AH-64 Apache helicopter gunship, you're gonna have to have one mean gun. Even the Iraqi Insurgents don't have a fighting chance, and they have military grade explosives and RPGs!
The US Military is not allowed to act as a military against its own people. And, when the time comes, the people in those tanks and helicopters are Americans as well, they are not going to blindly follow orders and turn them against their friends and neighbors.
Guns are for sport and self defense. In the US we have the right to keep and bear arms. Many states allow open carry of firearms, and many states allow the average citizen to carry concealed firearms if they are properly licensed. I personally have a Concealed Handgun Permit and carry a firearm every single day.
Funny thing is crimes with firearms are not as "rampant" as non-americans seem to think. It is all about the media, which I would hope the average joe realizes blows everything out of proportion.
It's the only reason the US is not yet completely clamped down - precisely because they have the right to bear arms. While there are an army of civilians out there who can fight back against these avaricious tyrants and their sock puppets ( which is the last resort for all of long suffering humanity ) the window to freedom at least remains open - without those guns: End-game years ago. The US falls and the world will follow like a house of cards. We in the UK are like neutered sheep and actually believe not being able to defend yourself on equal terms is a good thing!! This and a plethora of other plagues upon us that apparently enrich us no end and we meekly accept it..it's like that song ' what ever happened to the heroes?'. What have we become?? Because the time for actual fighting back is almost upon us...and it won't be pretty, though we deserve no less for abstaining from our individual duty to the health of out nation and it's future. We're all but helpless. Damn we need someone exemplary to rally the people!
If that is true Hujiklo, why was there no uprising against Bush other than a watered down mock impeachment threat? The use of social engineering, for which tools like reading private data and doing heuristical analysis give governments greater power to perform that social engineering with, lets them get away with oh shall we say, illegal wars..?
Blair putting tanks at Heathrow was a stab in the dark idea to try and garner support, it was blatant and risky, with access to private communications the government can reduce the risk on propaganda stunts like this when public opinion is in the balance for doing things that in any other circumstances would be deemed irrational and cause an uprising - which in the build up to the war was a close run thing, thanks to social engineering rebellious murmerings have died down - they even managed to get re-elected by getting dead people to vote!
Well, I'm in the U.S. and I'll tell you what... seeing the house and senate vote this bail out through was very disheartening ad the only ones who are in support of the bail out were the bigger CEOs and the bigger investors.
The first time through it was shot down, which brought up my opinions of being an American. I thought "they are listening, this is good". The second time it went through many of the congressmen even said that they merely changed their vote because they knew the economy wouldn't get better if they didnt. My opinion on that....... They are supposed to be working for us... regardless of what anyone else says they are supposed to be voting on our behalf. changing your vote because you 'feel' isn't an option Mr. Senator....
Soo all in all, my trust in the American way of life has become overly corrupted....
But in regards to the UK, all I have to say is "V for Vendetta!"
lol, don't have many crimes comitted with firearms in my city of about 500,000. I thought I'd check the police department case log. The last one seems a bit silly.
East Sacramento
July 2, 2008, 9:10 p.m., 56th Street and H Street: Armed Robbery
Two suspects, one armed with a handgun, robbed the fireworks stand in the parking lot of 56th Street and H Street. The suspects fled in a green SUV, possibly a GMC.
Thread is getting too political folks. You should be more concerened with behind-the-scenes data-collection. This affects all of us
and with all this american rights to bear arms all i want to know is what happens to the rest of the bear?
You surrender it to the greater good, but your still taxed on it.
If the average American realised the money was going to bail out foreign investors, they would be spitting feathers....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uIeKXjnYWA&feature=related...but $700 billion is the tip of the iceberg:
[edit]Actually I meant to link directly to the video on the front page of corbettreport.com:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zM79QpaxvOs The US Military is not allowed to act as a military against its own people. And, when the time comes, the people in those tanks and helicopters are Americans as well, they are not going to blindly follow orders and turn them against their friends and neighbors.
You mean like in New Orleans in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, or in LA during the riots in the aftermath of the Rodney King trial? I think you have a rather misinformed opinion on whether or not a gunner in an Abrams tank is going to pull the trigger on a gun waving maniac or not. The choice between getting shot and pulling the trigger, is no choice at all.
Funny thing is crimes with firearms are not as "rampant" as non-americans seem to think.
Really? That's an interesting perspective, considering that you're more than an order of magnitude more likely to be murdered by a person wielding a gun in the USA, than if you were a Coalition Soldier in Iraq. Think about it for a while. It's safer for you as an individual, to be part of an occupying military force in a war zone, than it is to live in the US.
It's the only reason the US is not yet completely clamped down - precisely because they have the right to bear arms.
Yes obviously. Because that worked so well in Bosnia and Iraq. Like I said, the pathetic firearms you're allowed to keep, don't scare the people who can call in Delta Force on your "domestic terrorist threat".
lol, don't have many crimes comitted with firearms in my city of about 500,000.
Probably not. What do you want to bet that more people die every year from gun homicide in your city of 500.000, compared to say the 300.000 US troops in Iraq?
Thread is getting too political folks.
Well that's obviously because this is a political issue. The technology for absolute surveillance doesn't exist. It must be so disheartening for all the powermongers of the world, to see their dreams of global domination shot down by technological advancements. Maybe that's what's spurring the recent bouts of anti-intellectualism? We need to stop technological progress, because technology shall set you free! We wouldn't want that to happen, would we?
You should be more concerened with behind-the-scenes data-collection.
Why? What are you going to do about it? Seriously? In London (which has the highest crime rate in Europe) there is one camera for every 6 citizens. Never the less politicians keep insisting that more surveillance makes you safer, and you keep voting for them (not you personally, I hope, you in general). All this despite at least
one documented case were overzealous police officers murdered an innocent man, because he *looked* like a terrorist? I mean really? Innocent until proven guilty? Ring any bells?
[quote}considering that you're more than an order of magnitude more likely to be murdered by a person wielding a gun in the USA, than if you were a Coalition Soldier in Iraq. Think about it for a while. It's safer for you as an individual, to be part of an occupying military force in a war zone, than it is to live in the US.[/quote]
The US is a bit place, and I for one have never even heard a gunshot. Only actually seen one person in town carrying a gun that wasn't a policeman. Only other time was up near lake shasta where some dude had a gun rack in the back of his truck, and a collection of some kind of deer strapped over the bonnet. Here at least Gun crime isn't as rife as you might think, being mostly confined to particular easy to aviod where no normal person has any reason to visit since there are no commercial buildings only the poorest drug riddled low income neighbourhoods.
As far as Iraq goes, you may have failed to notice that US and alied soldiers are rarely targets these days, it's usually Iraqi's against other Iraqis, shia v's sunni. They blow each other up on a daily basis, whilst US soldiers are mostly in danger in Afghanistan.
Looks like 44 people died from shooting incidents in 2007 within the county. You have a far, far higher chance of being run over by a car whilst crossing the street than getting shot.
The ONLY advantage of the right to bear arms is the ability to fight a civil war due to a bad bad government (for example if an extremist govt got in, cancelled elections, started exterminating people or demanding you get a permission slip to take a s***).
If the nazis, communists, fundamental religious nutters etc. got in to govt in the UK and slowly replaced the army chiefs and police with their own sympathizers who could stop them?
Other than that theres no point in owning guns. If no one has them then you dont need them.
If the nazis, communists, fundamental religious nutters etc. got in to govt in the UK and slowly replaced the army chiefs and police with their own sympathizers who could stop them?
Somebody like the deeply religious Tony Blair and his right hand man at the MET and his chief of propaganda at the BBC, sorry chief commissioner. A government elected in by the votes of the deceased? America got a similar leader in Bush, with an equally dubious election process. Neither nation revolted.
1984 has come and gone and we didn't rebel.
The only advantage of the right to bear arms is reinforcement of the belief that those pesky foreigners might instill communism on you. It's rule by fear.
Even in the UK if you want a gun you can just go get one, the fact they are illegal doesnt make much odds. I've been shot at 3 times, just because my assailants didnt have the paperwork to go with their firearm doesnt make it any less likely that they'll hit or miss when shooting at me.
There's less domestic shootings with sensible gun laws, less accidental stuff, and we still accomodate those who shoot for sport, with the exception of those who do it with assault rifles and underslung grenade launchers.
I dont really understand the attachment that Amicans have with guns. Then again, I never felt the need to fire one back when i've been in situations where guns have been involved. I much preffer the "be somewhere else" strategy.
1984 has come and gone and we didn't rebel.
the book title wasnt a prophetic one, he originally wanted it to be 1948, but his publishers wouldnt allow it
and on a side note catch 22 was originally catch 18 but another book was due out with 18 in the title
what if the jews had guns during world war 2?
I think that lots of people had guns in world war 2, it being a war and all, but if more Jews had had guns then more would have perished in the streets as opposed to in concentration camps. It's debatable which would be worse - perhaps neither, since both eventualities would result in bloodshed, pain, and death.
The US Military is not allowed to act as a military against its own people.
There was a huge article about this in the Army Times. As of October 1st, the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry, was deployed here in the USA.
The First Raiders will spend 2009 attached to the U.S. Northern Command. They will be based in Fort Stewart, Georgia, and focus primarily on logistics and support for local police and rescue personnel.
The Posse Comitatus Act was passed in 1878. In 2006, President George W. Bush pushed Congress to pass the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act, which included a section titled “Use of the Armed Forces in major public emergencies.” This section provided that “The President may employ the armed forces to restore public order in any State of the United States the President determines….” In effect, this bill obliterated Posse Comitatus.
When Congress passed the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act, however, the restrictions of Posse Comitatus were restored. But when President Bush signed the Act into law, he attached a signing statement (Executive Order) indicating that the Executive Branch did not feel bound by the changes enacted by the repeal. Hence, Posse Comitatus no longer exists.
Banshee wrote:
The only advantage of the right to bear arms is reinforcement of the belief that those pesky foreigners might instill communism on you. It's rule by fear.
The transitional stage of Communism would be one of the most ideal forms of governance if it could be meshed with freedom of the press and the rule of law. Universal suffrage is a tool that the powerful, informed few use to manipulate the ignorant masses.
The right to bear arms simply reinforces paranoia. Personal freedoms are great so long as they don't prevent others from making use of those same freedoms - which, sadly, the right to bear arms (through its implied threat of violence) does.
I don't think the right to bare arms figures significantly in most Americans minds. If you want one you can have one, and many people have a pistol or revolver for home defense. Some even have a small rifle for shooting pesky vermin. Chances are you won't see a gun outside of a gun or sports shop except holstered on a police officer.
People seem to think things are like on film and TV where everyone carries and is willing to shoot at a moments notice. Definately not the case around here.
> what if the jews had guns during world war 2?
Many did, putting up a fierce resistance.
People seem to think things are like on film and TV where everyone carries and is willing to shoot at a moments notice...
I doubt that anyone thinks that.
I doubt that anyone thinks that.
Many people on these forums talk as though they do. I guess you have to live here in an ordinary neighborhood to get a good grasp of things. Like all places, you get your poor areas where desperate people take desperate measures and make all the headlines.
Most murders are gang members on other gang members. By far the most dangerous thing here for your average joe are the useless drivers who don't use their turn signals, and pedestrians who don't bother to look before crossing because they have right of way and are too busy messing with their phone to pay any attention to anything around them, this somehow extends to cyclists too, who are supposed to stop at stop signs like all the other vehicles on the road, but rarely do.
> I've been shot at 3 times
That's rather a lot. Are you just unlucky or do other people where you live get shot at too?
> I dont really understand the attachment that Amicans have with guns.
I have none, but I do with the constitution which allows ownership - and if people want to change that they have a process whereby the right can be removed.
if the jews had more guns they would have been able to kill more S.S. or brownshirts - demoralizing them and possibly reducing their numbers so they could have been kept at bay.
this somehow extends to cyclists too, who are supposed to stop at stop signs like all the other vehicles on the road, but rarely do.
im a cyclist and stop at lights (apart from in the morning on these roadwork single lane jobbies when there isnt another car for ages) but i get torrets when this happens to me
i once was heading into town with another guy from the house who was taking the upstairs kids to the 2nd hand shop to trade in their playstation games he crossed a light when we had a red light and i had to pull the kids back and when we got the green man two cyclists whizzed passed us, i lost count of my verbal assault and they reported my outburst to a parked cop car, the police never came up to me about it so i assume the plod told them that they did run a red light almost endangering the lives of two children
and as for riding on the pavement i like to see what theyll ride into, the garden or oncoming traffic cos i never move and sometimes make myself that little bit wider
I have none, but I do with the constitution which allows ownership
That claim is extremely debatable, and that's being generous.
if the jews had more guns they would have been able to kill more S.S. or brownshirts - demoralizing them and possibly reducing their numbers so they could have been kept at bay.
That's not a very logical presumption. It only works if you assume that the Nazis would not alter their strategy accordingly.
If the Jews has been more heavily armed, the Nazis would have appropriately escalated their response to compensate for this enhanced armed resistance. Sure, more Nazis might be killed in this scenario but more Jews (and bystanders caught in the crossfire) would be killed in running battles. Also, if the Jews (and by extension, civilians in general) had been better armed, there would have been more deaths and injuries due to gun-misuse before the war even began.
Comparing the US to Bosnia and Iraq is like hijacking a porsche or a clapped-out Lada. One is obviously worth preserving intact - the other? Who cares? Certainly not our keepers. The US is the powerhouse behind world commerce even if it's now only through force or smoke and mirrors. All those guns are a huge obstacle for the final python squeeze. Insidious pressure groups all funded by the same parasitical tribe have been trying to ease guns out of public hands for years precisely to render it powerless..and always using the same tactic of milking the guilt out of us.
No Banker should control a country's money suppy. It's outright treason to even support it. The country belongs to the people's hands who built it not to some slimy, narcissistic toad in a suit, living a life of obscene luxury through slight of hand and treachery. Until the creation and supply of money is wrestled from their boney hands we're all enslaved to them and so are children and their children etc..
Jews and Nazis - it's a different scenario completely! Now we're all the enemy, and we all need guns. Try upscaling your response to a 30 million resistance where there is an infrastructure you want hijack completely...and intact. This is precisely why they're resorting to stealth, while we enjoy the hollywood bread and circuses they fund for us.
*EDIT*
Actually I was just thinking about if we all had guns tomorrow, and of course it's a recipe for chaos, especially with the dumbed-down irresponsible, populace they way it is. Pity we ever let ourselves slide into this hole in the first place :(
even if i were allowed one i dont think id have a gun
i think too many people i know would be smarter if i shot them in the head
> That claim is extremely debatable, and that's being generous.
Yeah, and I'm sure freedom of the press should only apply to state appointed journalists too, I've heard the garbage argument a billion times and it is still garbage.
People seem to think things are like on film and TV where everyone carries and is willing to shoot at a moments notice.
Films and TV? I don't even have a TV. Simply looking at the NRA website will give you that idea. Since the NRA is chiefly American, I would suggest that many of them agree with that particular point of view.
if the jews had more guns they would have been able to kill more S.S. or brownshirts - demoralizing them and possibly reducing their numbers so they could have been kept at bay.
Really? Is that so?
1) The British Army, the French Army, the Russian Army and the US Army, all had better guns, better training and more manpower than the Jews, and even then it took them more than 3 years to break the back of the German war machine (at the Battle of Stalingrad).
2) Practically all Polish Jews were armed, as were communists, unionists and other groups targeted by Germans as undesirables, but without organization, it is practically impossible to oppose a proper army. As the Americans have so painfully learned in the Middle East, winning a war of aggression, is not about who has the biggest guns.
3) Guns do not empower you to defend yourself. It is perfectly feasible to defend yourself and even kill someone while being unarmed.
4) You cannot demoralize a fanatic.
One is obviously worth preserving intact - the other? Who cares? Certainly not our keepers.
Well since they spent billions of dollars on mercenaries to protect the oil pipelines, there is evidence to suggest they wanted to take both Bosnia and Iraq intact as well. Your assumption that the US is the only country worth taking intact is charitably speaking rather absurd.
Your assumption that the US is the only country worth taking intact is charitably speaking rather absurd.
I found it 'charitably speaking rather offensive.' and indicative of an insular view where saluting the flag every morning makes a country great even if there is no other evidence. I mean, if you had a terminal illness and where broke you would be far better off in Iraq than in America. In Iraq at least the hospitals would try to help, even American field hospitals would if on a "hearts & minds" mission. Iraq might be a bit of a mess thanks to the greatest country in the world dropping bombs on it, but it's still leading America in some areas.
if the jews had more guns they would have been able to kill more S.S. or brownshirts - demoralizing them and possibly reducing their numbers so they could have been kept at bay.
And if we drop more bombs on Germany they will have to surrender! We need more bombers!
and as for riding on the pavement i like to see what theyll ride into
I ride on the pavement, half the time thats because they ran out of pain for the cycle lane and so the pavement goes back to being just pavement... The other half the time its because there's no cycle lane, and in one place its because the cycle lane is so rediculous and dangerous I refuse to use it, or to cross the busy road for a few hundred metres only to come back again.
Cycle lanes around my way have increased in quantity dramatically and whilst some of them are a bit ill-considered they have changed my view on cycling a lot, they've taken me away from the road to the point I am barely on the road at all.
I'd rather ride slower on the pavement then take the risk of sharing tarmac with Puki. :P
BTW looks like new grids of speed cameras coming the UK's way, which take average speed from multiple sources so you can't cheat them. Also they don't run out of film like current ones do, so expect a lot more speeding tickets :(
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/article4909662.ece We have average speed cameras on the A14 next to where I live, and it's still a very dangerous road. People dont speed as much on it, but they still tailgate which is what actually causes all the accidents.
Had a creepy Big Brother moment today:
Sat having a snack and ciggy in my local town shopping precinct, which I'm fully aware is festooned with CCTV cameras, but now they've fitted a speaker system throughout piping in godawful, pacifying musak - I can just imagine the nightmare of unrelenting jingle bells come the xmas season. :/
Anyway, a disembodied soft, female voice cuts into the music to announce "will all shoppers please remember that this shopping centre is fully covered by CCTV for your ease-of-mind and safety", or something like that.
Proper spooked me. They'll be fitting remote control gun turrets next.
i thought she might have said "may i remind all shoppers this is a no smoking centre"
im sure thats happened to me (well not me as i dont smoke) when some one just sparks up
That puts me in the mood for a game of Syndicate.
They haven't quite got as far as banning smoking but if you throw the finished ciggy on the ground, you get fed to lions, or something. Or maybe it's starving pigs. I forget.
Luckily shopping centres come pre-equipped with ash trays. They look a bit like CCTV lenses though.
Heh, and I got annoyed when the library told me there was a lecture in one of the rooms downstairs in the same kind of voice the other day lol.
Here in California Photo radar or speed cameras are banned by law, but red light cameras are allowed. Santa Clara county (silicon valley area) introduced them anyway 1n 1996 but were forced to drop them last year and have to refund millions in illegally collected fines.
> People dont speed as much on it, but they still tailgate which is what actually causes all the accidents
Hey .. we need tailgate cameras! I would write to my MP if I knew who he/she was. I will predict the next big idea to come from the UK government though ....
==Carbon FootPrint Cameras==
These will montior motorists ... not their speed, but how well they drive in order to keep their carbon footprint down. I can already see the letter coming through the post:
Mr R Sole,
On the 14th of November 2009 a CF camera recorded you driving along the A666 for 7.5 seconds in 3rd gear. You should have been in 5th gear for this duration of time. The penalty for this act of callous behaviour as been set at £800. This must be paid in full within 8 days
Speaking of guns, deer season is coming up soon. Bagged four last year and hope to bag more than that this year. Economy being what it is, we could do with a freezer full of venison.
> Speaking of guns, deer season is coming up soon.
Disgusting! (Hunting is OK, it's the Venison that is disgusting)
Disgusting! (Hunting is OK, it's the Venison that is disgusting)
Mix it with rabbit in a pie and you have Bambi and Thumper pie! It might not be to your taste, but you can at least give it out instead of Candy on trick or treat night to make the little kiddies cry.
the brownshirts and the German Army were 2 seperate things,
The brownshirts were the local thugs hired to keep the populace in line.
YET AGAIN more data goes 'missing' !
The HardDisk in question from the MOD is actually unaccounted for(!)
I would try looking on eBay if I were them
Now, that's not the worst of it. The personal data stored on the H/D is UNENCRYPTED!! This is the MOD we are talking about. Why don't they just send out a weekly newsletter with everyone's details on it
Well, not to worry UK'ers .. all these security blunders and spying methods ... it can't get any worse ..
**oops**
If the blunders were really blunders, they wouldn't make the news, which is controlled by the intelligence agencies. Why this sudden spate of high profile blunders? To justify the the laws that will be passed off the back of them. As you say, why isn't it encrypted? It's standard practice.
To justify the the laws that will be passed off the back of them.
What laws? If anything, all this publicity about data loss is making it harder and harder for the government to introduce stupid things like ID cards. No one trusts the government to hold our confidential info safely anymore.
They just started issuing ID cards to immigrants the other week. I guess that's supposed to be their way of introducing it through the back door and getting the public used to the damned things. An ID card may seem like a small thing, but I remember early on when I first came to the US, having to carry ID at all times did feel like it was impinging on my freedom. A subtle but psychological thing mostly.
I've gotten so used to it now that I no longer give it a second thought.
In other news:
'My Little Pony' MP3 player with nuclear rocket launch data goes missing!