Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I agree with surveillance cameras. I have nothing to hide from. I don't speed (too much), I don't run red lights. In stores, I'm not a clepto. I'm not a robber.
If somebody ELSE does those things, having a camera with THEIR face plastered on it allows for proper JUSTICE.
In the industrialised west our fathers have fought for generations to gain a modicum of 'rights' for us, it is estimated that these rights have been fought for, for 200 years at the least.
Why give any away without a fight it will take 200 years to regain lost ground.
In the industrialised west our fathers have fought for generations to gain a modicum of 'rights' for us, it is estimated that these rights have been fought for, for 200 years at the least.
Why give any away without a fight it will take 200 years to regain lost ground.
Where does it say that a person has the right to privacy?
"The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either."
I see that some on this thread are members of "The Party"
Surveillance
The invention of print made it easier to manipulate public opinion, and the film and the radio carried the process further. With the development of television, and the technical advance which made it possible to receive and transmit simultaneously on the same instrument, private life came to an end.
Any sound Winston made, above the level of a whisper, would be picked up by the telescreen; moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard.
Every citizen, or at least every citizen important enough to be worth watching, could be kept twenty-four hours a day under the eyes of the police and in the sound of official propaganda, with all other channels of communication closed. The possibility of enforcing not only complete obedience to the will of the State, but complete uniformity of opinion of all subjects now existed.
Never show dismay! Never show resentment! A single flicker of the eyes could give you away. It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away. A nervous tic, an unconscious look of anxiety, a habit of muttering to yourself - anything that carried with it the suggestion of abnormality, of having something to hide. In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face (to look incredulous when a victory was announced, for example) was itself a punishable offense. There was even a word for it in Newspeak: facecrime it was called. Your worst enemy was your own nervous system. Any moment the tension inside you was liable to translate itself into some visible symptom.
At home and in bed in the darkness you were safe from the telescreen so long as you kept silent. The most deadly danger of all was talking in your sleep. There was no way of guarding against that, so far as he could see. Nothing was your own except the few cubic centimetres inside your skull.
There was no place where you could be more certain that the telescreens were watched continuously than at the urinals. Winston kept his back turned to the telescreen. It was safer; though, as he well knew, even a back can be revealing. It was like trying to make a move at chess when you were already mated. Whichever way you turned, the telescreen faced you.
In general you could not assume that you were much safer in the country than in London. There were no telescreens, of course, but there was always the danger of concealed microphones by which your voice might be picked up and recognized; besides, it was not easy to make a journey by yourself without attracting attention. For distances of less than 100 kilometres it was not necessary to get your passport endorsed, but sometimes there were patrols hanging about railway stations, who examined the papers of any Party member they found there and asked awkward questions. The patrols might stop you if you happened to run into them. 'May I see your papers, comrade? What are you doing here? What time did you leave work? Is this your usual way home?' - and so on and so forth. Not that there was any rule against walking home by an unusual route: but it was enough to draw attention to you if the Thought Police heard about it.
The physical difficulty of meeting was enormous. Except by direct enquiry it was never possible to discover where anyone lived. There were no directories of any kind. As for sending a letter through the mails, it was out of the question By a routine that was not even secret, all letters were opened in transit. Actually, few people ever wrote letters. For the messages that it was occasionally necessary to send, there were printed postcards with long lists of phrases, and you struck out the ones that were inapplicable.
In the far distance a helicopter skimmed down between the roofs, hovered for an instant like a bluebottle, and darted away again with a curving flight. It was the police patrol, snooping into people's windows. The patrols did not matter, however. Only the Thought Police mattered.
You're A Fool If You Don't Think This Is Not Open to Abuse
Anyone who thinks a surveillance state is a safe state is ignorant of the threat that such a system poses to personal freedoms and political dissent. These are the foremost tools of tyranny. Once systems like these are in place then all that is required for tyranny to rise is the desire for power on the part of those who control the system.
No guns or tanks necessary. No declarations. Nothing out of the ordinary.
They would control the men and women who control the media. They would control the officers of the military. They would control clergy. They would control commerce. They would control the bureaucracy. They would control the judiciary. They would control the vote counters.
You and your loved ones would be safe so long as neither they nor you did anything illegal.
They, however, would also control the laws.
And by the time you considered a law unjust, your ability to voice your dissent, to organize opposition, or to civilly disobey that law would be gone because you your voice would be silenced immediately because dissent would be the first thing to be made illegal.
We are weaving a web and trusting that no spider will take advantage of it.
Read what is below and understand that the moment you say, "It can't happen here," is the very moment that spider has been waiting for.
Quote:
Ceaucescu’s paranoia seems wholly in proportion to his inflated sense of purpose. Government surveillance was highly organised in Romania. People deemed a threat to the regime were regularly ‘disappeared’. Marina explains how, when leading tour groups through Romania, she would be continually followed by agents of the securitate.
Phone lines were tapped and mail was intercepted. Museums had false walls where eavesdroppers could listen out for words of dissent. Most effective were the vast network of informers, comprised of everyday members of the public.
This is the truly terrifying prospect behind the ID Cards Bill. The more sensitive data which is collected on citizens in one place, the more opportunities any future Government has to blackmail opposition or otherwise suppress dissent. The Data Protection Principles are obviously designed to avoid this but unfortunately are not enforced in the legislation.
The Government issues deliberately misleading statements such as:
Quote:
“In reality, the basic information [the NIR] holds will reveal much less than mobile phone or plastic card records that can already be requested by the police to aid a criminal investigation."—Andy Burnham, ID Cards Minister
This is either a plain lie or Burnham still hadn’t read his own Bill. The NIR is intended to keep an audit trail of every usage of the card, whether you just visited an abortion/STD clinic or went on holiday abroad. It is also deeply misleading as I will explain in the next few paragraphs.
Quote:
The home secretary, Charles Clarke, will today guarantee that the personal details contained on the national identity card will not go beyond those currently held on passports. - Charles Clarke (http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article320351.ece - broken link)
Bear in mind, Clarke was talking about only the first of 3 distinct data stores:
In terms of the data collected, all can be considered one giant virtual database. So when Ministers talk about limiting the data on the card or the NIR, it is meaningless whilst other databases can be linked to the NIR.
It will not be possible to add a police national computer (PNC) number to the Register.
Which is true, but unfortunately does not prevent our new National Identity Registration Numbers (IRNs) being added to the PNC databases and thus connecting them to the NIR. And since the Home Secretary can demand to see the PNC at whim, we can see that Clarke has admitted the need to restrict data access, whilst deceiving both Parliament and public into believing that he has actually done so. Considering what is at stake, this is a truly insidious manoever.
Why are IRNs fundamental to privacy?
The next 5 quotes come from the Home Office’s own ID Cards Benefits Overview document (broken link).
Quote:
This [Identity Registration] number if also recorded in other databases provides the key for service providers to access their own records speedily and effectively. For example, an individual requires a service. The service provider needs to access the records relating to that individual that are held on the service provider’s database. However due to variations in spelling of names, change of names, addresses and more than one person having the same name, it is likely that any such search will return a number of responses. The provider may then have to filter these to arrive at the correct record or they may have to spend time asking people for other information like date of birth or address, to locate the correct record. If the service provider’s database also records the IRN, then when the ID card is verified the confirmed IRN can be used by the service provider to access these records quickly and accurately. —pg 11
Here, the Home Office kindly describe how the IRN is clearly essential to join together databases, thus providing a quick, automatic and accurate dossier on all British citizens’ private lives.
Quote:
When carrying out the identity check, there will be an electronic transfer to the application for disclosure form, of the IRN associated with that identity on the ID Cards Scheme. This number can then be used by the police to access records on their databases that are associated with the same IRN.—pg 5
Thus confirming that police databases will be re-engineered to contain an IRN for each individual so that, contrary to Clarke’s assertion, they can be connected with the NIR.
Quote:
Use of the IRN throughout the criminal justice system will ensure that cases can move through the system and across various CJS databases via a common key. —pg 10
Quote:
The biometric information and IRN held on the ID Cards Scheme will allow travel operators to identify UK and foreign national travellers registered on the scheme swiftly and confidently.—pg 5
These explain how the Criminal Justice System databases and travel databases will also become connected to the NIR.
Quote:
Areas such as account takeover fraud, credit card fraud, mortgage fraud, and telecommunications services fraud will yield financial benefits. There are also some benefits due to more efficient administration. We have not yet been able to factor in the step change efficiency improvements that would be possible for the private sector if their own systems were to make use of the IRN. —pg 7
Thus even banks, phone companies and ISPs will become part of the mass surveillance network.
But he already has unlimited powers to perform surveillance of the Internet thanks to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000—akin to opening everyone’s private letters and resealing them without anyone knowing.
The Surveillance State
Yes, the world’s first Surveillance State has almost been built: the IRNs are the key sorting mechanism that ties all our data together.
When the Government has built this database, they will have unprecedented power to coerce the public into doing as they’re told.
This is why they are being so secretive. This is why we must stop the ID Cards Bill at any cost.
Unfortunately, that will not be the end of the matter. The reason why the Government are continually trying confuse us with the cost of ID cards vs passports is that, even if we stop the ID Bill, our Government has a backup database planned under the biometric passports scheme, which they have decided shouldn’t even be scrutinised by Parliament.
Excerpted from The Meta-Database (http://www.bristol-no2id.org.uk/blog/?page_id=5 - broken link)
Where does it say that a person has the right to privacy?
Let me turn that around and then ask you, where does it say that the gov't has the right to invade our privacy?
As to your question, to me, the following holds very dear in my heart:
Quote:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
Firstly, we have certain rights, rights that include and are not limited to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. My interpretation is that Liberty,
Secondly, in my book, that phrase includes Privacy - as it is my right to Happiness and Liberty and Life to not have other people, be they some smuck across the street or some government entity tracking, spying, and monitoring my whereabouts and movements.
Thirdly, the 4th Amendment of the US Constitution puts forth and warrants that "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Now, granted that this Amendment for the most part is taken to mean a person's house and/or car, for example, but again my interpretation, this Amendment also includes the words "to be secure in their persons", which I take to mean my body.
Fouthly, I alluded to how this all smacks of an Orwellian 1984 world,,, maybe some of you that are so gung ho on having these cameras on every corner, monitoring your every move have not read this book?
Lastly, ok, if you [you being those that are in favour of these cameras] haven't read that book, then what about watching the movie "Minority Report"? Nothing within that makes you maybe even slightly worried? That gov't and/or private entities that have data/information on you could potentially misuse that, to frame, to manipulate, to even just make mistakes, mistakes that could cost you? Are those costs really worth the supposed advantages? Not in my book, no thank you.
Parliament? I thought we were talking about the US. My bad.
We are talking about the free world, the west and western Enlightenment values of individual liberty, government subservience to the people, freedom of speech, right of redress of grievances, and the right to be secure in our own person.
Rights vary from country to country, but if you were to tell me I had to live in any country other than the United States, I would choose a western democracy. For all the differences between the US and Canada, Germany, France, Finland, Greece, The Netherlands, or even little Iceland, we are bound by not by language or history, but by Enlightenment ideals and legal systems founded on those ideals. To lose any single western nation to totalitarianism dims the flame of Liberty that shines upon and nourishes us all.
Can you not see that we are building a prison for ourselves? Immuring ourselves bit by bit for some alleged promise of safety that even the promise makers have said they cannot deliver? All it takes is a jail master to yank the key out of your hand, to turn the surveillance cameras, the opened mail, the email, the microphones, the data trails, into instruments of political power.
Have we ever seen a political system where power has not been abused by those who desire it? What saint will we elect who will deny him or herself the power such data contains? Is there any member of congress or parliament without something to be ashamed of? Something that could be used for blackmail? Is there anything preventing the government of the day to spy upon political enemies and opposition party leaders and enter disinformation into a such a system?
"I want you to do a search. Find all days last year when Senator Q was home alone, without his family."
"Hmm.. Here. July 14. His wife was visiting family with the kids."
"Who was his ISP at the time?"
"It was AT&T, ma'am."
"Access the log and see where he went."
"I don't show any internet access at that time, ma'am."
"No visitors then?"
"No, we show no one entering or leaving the house except Senator Q."
"I see. Here's what you will do. Enter in access records showing he visited these two child pornography websites. We've already seized their records. We can modify those later to agree with the times you're going to enter. Have him stay on for a good 20 minutes or so."
"Done."
"Good. Now remember, I was not here. I did not ask you to do this. You want that mortgage you just applied for? Your husband to keep his job? Your kids to suddenly not be hauled away by social services? You know what will happen to you if you talk about this to anyone or meet anyone on the yellow list. Keep your mouth shut."
"Yes ma'am."
"Senator Q! Great to talk to you. How are the wife and kids? Great, great. Now listen here. We've done a little trace work and found that you visited a, well, questionable web site that could be very politically damaging to you and your campaign. May even result in criminal charges. Calm down Senator. Please. You're a respected person in your party and I'm sure my department would be willing to work with you to iron out this little problem. There's a resolution we want you.... Yes Senator, that one. We'd like you to reconsider your position on this resolution. Oh? Can we? That's wonderful news! I'm sure we'll look forward to working with you a bit closer in the future as well. Thank you for your time Senator Q. Have a good afternoon and say, 'Hi,' to Leslie and the boys."
We are talking about the free world, the west and western Enlightenment values of individual liberty, government subservience to the people, freedom of speech, right of redress of grievances, and the right to be secure in our own person.
Rights vary from country to country, but if you were to tell me I had to live in any country other than the United States, I would choose a western democracy. For all the differences between the US and Canada, Germany, France, Finland, Greece, The Netherlands, or even little Iceland, we are bound by not by language or history, but by Enlightenment ideals and legal systems founded on those ideals. To lose any single western nation to totalitarianism dims the flame of Liberty that shines upon and nourishes us all.
Can you not see that we are building a prison for ourselves? Immuring ourselves bit by bit for some alleged promise of safety that even the promise makers have said they cannot deliver? All it takes is a jail master to yank the key out of your hand, to turn the surveillance cameras, the opened mail, the email, the microphones, the data trails, into instruments of political power.
Have we ever seen a political system where power has not been abused by those who desire it? What saint will we elect who will deny him or herself the power such data contains? Is there any member of congress or parliament without something to be ashamed of? Something that could be used for blackmail? Is there anything preventing the government of the day to spy upon political enemies and opposition party leaders and enter disinformation into a such a system?
"I want you to do a search. Find all days last year when Senator Q was home alone, without his family."
"Hmm.. Here. July 14. His wife was visiting family with the kids."
"Who was his ISP at the time?"
"It was AT&T, ma'am."
"Access the log and see where he went."
"I don't show any internet access at that time, ma'am."
"No visitors then?"
"No, we show no one entering or leaving the house except Senator Q."
"I see. Here's what you will do. Enter in access records showing he visited these two child pornography websites. We've already seized their records. We can modify those later to agree with the times you're going to enter. Have him stay on for a good 20 minutes or so."
"Done."
"Good. Now remember, I was not here. I did not ask you to do this. You want that mortgage you just applied for? Your husband to keep his job? Your kids to suddenly not be hauled away by social services? You know what will happen to you if you talk about this to anyone or meet anyone on the yellow list. Keep your mouth shut."
"Yes ma'am."
"Senator Q! Great to talk to you. How are the wife and kids? Great, great. Now listen here. We've done a little trace work and found that you visited a, well, questionable web site that could be very politically damaging to you and your campaign. May even result in criminal charges. Calm down Senator. Please. You're a respected person in your party and I'm sure my department would be willing to work with you to iron out this little problem. There's a resolution we want you.... Yes Senator, that one. We'd like you to reconsider your position on this resolution. Oh? Can we? That's wonderful news! I'm sure we'll look forward to working with you a bit closer in the future as well. Thank you for your time Senator Q. Have a good afternoon and say, 'Hi,' to Leslie and the boys."
Believe it or not this is actually happening in the UK now and has been for many a long year, what I am specifically referring to is the composition of the "Black book" here is stored all the peccadilloes of each and every member of government and big business, the church, the armed forces etc. etc.
Jeremy Paxman in his book, The Political Animal, referred to such use of documents held in abeyance until such time as they are needed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You're A Fool If You Don't Think This Is Not Open to Abuse
