Slashdot Mirror
No Passport For Britons Refusing Mass Surveillance
UpnAtom writes "People who refuse to give up their bank records, tax records & details of any benefits they've claimed, and the records of their car movements for the last year, or refuse to submit to an interrogation on whether they are the same person that this mountain of data belongs to — will be denied passports from March 26th. The Blair government has already admitted that this and other data will be cross-linked so that the Home Office and other officials can spy on the everyday lives of innocent Britons. Britons were already the most spied upon nation in Western Europe — more so even than Sweden. Data-mining through this unprecedented level of mass-surveillance allows any future British government to leapfrog even countries like China and North Korea."
I am so, so happy that I've moved to Canada from the UK. It no longer feels like I'm being watched all the time (not paranoia, CCTV. It's all over the place).
it's V for Vendetta coming true!!!!
However, we do have one advantage over North Korea: Blair has less credibility than Kim Il Jong. And unlike most facist governments, they can't get the trains to run on time either.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
they just sit there in that pan of slowly heating water...
How does this benefit the average citizen?
It won't reduce terrorist activities.
It won't reduce crime.
All it will do is make it easier for the government to find SOMETHING on you if they ever want to.
People in the US value their privacy and expect more of it than in Europe. I've lived in London and Paris for a time and both cities are full of surveillance. Even the French now data mine public transit. I've never been to Scandinavia but I can tell you that there is a totally different attitude about it there. More people accept and even want cameras etc...on every light pole. transactions are monitored and mined more there. That is why banks use data centers in Europe to store information. All Interpol tracking is done their, that is why pedophile rings are always busted from Europe. The are far more Orwellian societies.
So, does this mean that it's impossible to leave the country unless you first give over all your personal data? Even if you want to leave solely because you don't want to give that data?
I wonder if and when the first people will start running smuggling operations out of Britain.
Breaking Into the Industry - A development log about starting a game studio.
From the article: "I think people will recognise that its appropriate once in their lifetime to go through a little bit more inconvenience..."
Are passports issued for life in Britain? I doubt it.
The average citizen receives the pride of knowing that they are playing their preordained part in the ten thousand year old game of social control: Create debt, maintain debt, keep people in debt, work them until they die of debt.
the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
The Daily Mail?
That's like an american getting views on the democratic party from Fox News.
Daily Mail Watch is a good read, if you've not seen what this 'paper' prints before.
I renewed my British passport last year, even though my old one had plenty of time left on it. Nobody was too sure of the details, other than a price increase and a loss of privacy, but everyone knew that 2007 was going to bring some big changes.
What with this sort of behaviour and the whole RFID fiasco, British passports aren't much fun. Which is a shame, because they have the potential to be the best book you could ever own.
Anyone who laughed that Blair and Bush were pushing for a Nazi level of governmental control over people's lives, who's laughing now? Bush/Blair now claim the right to abduct anyone, anywhere, for no reason, and they make it a crime to even disclose their abuses of civil rights.
Kind of amazing, how Prescott Bush helped finance Hitler's rise to power... how George W Bush's first business partner was Osama Bin Laden's brother, and how all this ties together in forwarding a Nazi-looking kleptocratic agenda.
Maybe it's this.
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
The catch seems to be that this applies to British citizens, not others living in Britain. As an American, in light of the the recent events, I have just decided never to give up my citizenship, no matter how long I decide to live in England.
I used to be very proud of being English. I believed Britain to be a light in the darkness and a bastion of freedom. I believed that the U.K., along with the U.S., stood as examples to the rest of the world as to what was possible when freedom won out over fear. But today, I no longer feel that way. I see freedoms being given up for illusory safety, and an unprecedented level of control being given to a government that has never proven itself even remotely worthy or capable of such a responsibility. Mostly, I feel anger and sadness, and a sense of frustration that the proverbial shining city on the hill has become so horribly tarnished with the shit of misinformation, misdirection, fear-mongering, and mediocre talking-heads proclaiming that just a few more liberties need to go to make us all safe.
Many Americans, I suspect, can relate.
P.P.S. I'm doing Science and I'm still alive.
Wow. Just watched "V for Vendetta" on cable last night. Turned on the computer, went over to slashdot, and this is the first story I see. Spooky.
Car Movements?
What, you're supposed to keep track every time you shit in your car over there?
How insane is that?
In fact please have a look here for how many European nations are run today.
... sometimes known as soviet canuckistan, terrorists have a right to a passport.
Really, if they are canadian citizens, they do have a right to a passport.
This is one of the ripples forward through time of the affinity for monarchy, I think. While most European governments in present day have leaders that are elected, there are still the remnants of monarchy, which are held on to quite firmly and even fondly. This unconscious collective desire for protection by a good and powerful parent has to manifest itself in other ways now, one of which is wide-scale state surveillance. In an era where "God Save The Queen" doesn't in and of itself mean much when the Queen's just a nice old lady on telly, there needs to be some other symbol for the collective unconscious to latch onto.
Of course, that doesn't mean the parent is in fact either good or powerful, just that the desire for it on the part of the population has them see it that way.
In America a similar thing seems to be true (because the culture descended from European culture), but the anti-monarchy element that lead to the Revolution means that it seems to require a larger perceived threat before people are willing to accept it. Hence the need for 9/11 and the saturation advertising for the war on terra.
Of course, the connection they fail to make is that "the government", any government is made up of two classes of people; bureaucrats and politicians. Neither are a particularly trustworthy bunch. This is actually the problem I have with people saying "the government should". What they're really saying is that they want politicians and bureaucrats to become more involved in their lives...
Deleted
I apologise for the fact it's always been like that:
Apparently you brits have gone under the iron fist already. Turkey seems a rights heaven when compared to what we are reading now ...
Read radical news here
This is news - this level of control cannot be the initiative of only one man, which is to say that Tony Blair is only the pimple on the boil. So, the question is, what is the driving force behind all of this? Is the public is clamoring for more cameras and record snooping?
Ugggh.... I bow to your legal training based on watching "Braveheart". Especially that bit when the evil dude cut his wife's throat! How corrupt was that! And don't forget the law against taking goats across London Bridge - total evil, evil I tell you! We should all rise up against this corrupt system immediately. You first.
If your theory is different from practice, then your theory is wrong.
If what you say is true, I'd note:
If the Canadian government *believe* they are terrorists - they still have a right to own a passport.
Go Canada, I say.
how many supposedly deomcratic governments hate and fear freedom. In the US Bush was yanking citizens rights as he was proclaiming the terrorist hate us for our freedom. I'm not as familiar with the British Constitution so I'm not sure about the legality of the all the big brother tactics. In the US the Constitution is quite specific about unreasonable search and seisure. Britian has taken the stance of zero privacy and the US is headed in that direction. Is the reason in the US to lock more people up? Our prisons are already over crowded. The dark side of the electronics boom is it's making it possible to micromanage peoples lives. Cheap cameras and powerful computers are giving the governments an unpresidented ability to look over our shoulders. Nothing to hide? Everyone forgets the McCarthy era when innocent lives were ruined for no reason. The true irony in that case was if they were Communists our Constitution allows them to preach it from the steps of the White House but the law was abused for personal gain. It's always about power and control.
So now where do I go to avoid the draft if Bush decides to invade Iran (and 5 bucks says he'd claim that was under his power as president as part of the war on terror)? Obviously not the UK, I don't want to be on camera 24/7 if I'm hiding... not Sweden anymore with *their* recent appearance in the news... Canada seems OK on the surface, but I have the oddest feeling that today they'd return a draft dodger if Bush asked nicely... All the rest of Europe is going to have GPS tracking via passport soon it seems... Japan is getting worse and worse for foreigners...
Do I go to Australia, or are they just as bad? Is there anywhere in the world I can have broadband access *and* not need to carry a gun in the streets or fear the government spying on me?
Ages ago a beacon of democracy and progress and now a country I seriously would not even want to visit as a tourist any more???
As the island of our knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance.
Really? what kind of human you are is not determined by what side of the camera you are on.
It seems to me that real terrorist would want to find suckers to set up, so to keep the public on the edge of terrorism scare, while hiding behind the guise of supporting anti-terrorism.
The bad teeth championship just isn't what it used to be.
the UK are players again...
Still, I'd say the OP is not entirely wrong to extrapolate from Braveheart: despite all our rules, truly powerful men (there are very few truly powerful women in this sense) fashion and bend the rules of society and government to work in their favor, and we are all living under systems which are the result of centuries of such distortion. In some ways it's quite amazing that the major democracies are still as free as they are, although we seem to be correcting that little anomaly now.
Do I even need to finish the quote?
It would be rather ironic if, 230-some years after the Americans decided they'd had enough of being subjects of Parliament and the King, the people of the United Kingdom were the first to overthrow their modern fascist government. Perhaps it might set an example for the rest of us.
I wonder which government would be easier to tackle, given the severe restrictions of firearms in the UK versus the sheer inertia of the US population? Perhaps it should start with the Republican movement in the UK, by getting rid of the monarchists, the fascists, and the authoritarians, and drawing up a true Constitution. That ought to at least buy you another couple of hundred years of relative freedom.
I think the Revolution may be coming sooner, rather than later. Personally, I'd explore the possibility of moving to the UK, but not as a subject, and not without a guaranteed right to bear arms against a tyrannical government.
This world is becoming a truly scary place.
... to send a train-load of TNT to the Parlament Building yet?
This would be the time to declare independence. Seems Whitehall and Parliament DO need to be kicked in the teeth once every 200 years.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
So little info. Which one actually draws the conclusion the submitter is rattled by?
Ten years ago the British passport form was one of the world's most efficient and easy to fill out.
In a country surrounded by other countries with vastly better cuisine, you better believe passports are a fact of life. And so to must fraud be.
As for the surveillance.. uhm.. what about British citizens in other countries that don't visit Britain anymore? I believe people are subject to laws where they live.
Well... OK. But you seem to be saying that the legal rules are those things that powerful people try to get around, which I'd agree with.
If anything, the legal system has become increasingly powerful over the ages, to all our benefit. A great example is the separation of the executive from the judicial systems (which is being undermined in the US and the UK right now).
We might even be moving back to a less legal system (like that which operated in the days of Braveheart). So it doesn't make sense to attack the legal system - that's about the only protection we do have from these rapacious predators. We should be supporting it and strengthening it.
Summary contains a Daily Mail link, so I call FUD on general principal (actually, on second thought it scares me that the Daily Mail might not be considered 'right-wing' on the American political spectrum).
Also, what connection does the "records of their car movements for the last year" link have to all of this? As far as I can see the two things are separate, apart from the requirement for a large database.
The first thing I thought of when I saw this was the tower of Cirith Ungol in Lord of the Rings. After Frodo and Sam pass through it, they realize it's purpose is not as much to keep Men and Elves out of Mordor, but to keep Sauron's armies in!
What if you can't do interviews, if you're someone who gets very nervous during any sort of interview and stumble your words and forget things, the chances of being labelled a fraudster rather than someone who's just nervous would rise. Not good.
Like another post about this situation, I used to think Britain was OK but the government are making us all bite pillows now in the name of "freedom".
To do something right, you often have to roll up your sleeves and get busy.
wrong, they sell your data after VOLUNTARILY making a purchase there. The government TAKES all public AND private data and uses it for whatever they choose. Very different. I don't go to Walmart and avoid that, but buying anything via the banking system, taking a plane, employment, taxes, my license, passport, the government is far more intrusive, especially in the EU.
We, the West, needed the Cold War to remind us of what was soulless and wrong with communist surveilance society police states. Now that the USSR has fallen, we have lost our perspective and are becoming what we used to despise.
that what is out in the open may not be what is really going on. The best way to create subterfuge is to admit to lesser items, and then hide the other stuff deeper. I would be surprised if either America or UK has any inkling of an idea of how much spying there really is.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Notice that the Netherlands, Germany, and Austria all are listed as blue/green countries in the Privacy International map, while the UK and the US, both nations with no national ID system, are in the red/black zone.
Overall, national ID cards by themselves don't threaten privacy, inadequate privacy legislation, tolerance of governmental intrusion into privacy, and tolerance of legal abuse of private information threaten privacy.
Curiously, all the fuss raised over national ID card systems usually come from same governments and political groups that then turn around and commit massive invasions of privacy and civil rights. I think they are actually simply using the national ID "debates" to bamboozle and distract people while they quietly realize their real agendas of a total surveillance state.
And they keep using that strategy elsewhere: they keep talking about less intrusive government, privacy rights, and states rights, but then turn around and create legislation that reaches into people's bedrooms and substance use. They keep talking about reducing the size of government, self-reliance, free markets, and fiscal conservatism, but bankrupt the government with bloating the size of the military, create artificial and unjustified monopolies through ill-conceived modifications to the copyright and patent systems, and waste billions on government handouts to their buddies in industry.
The national ID card debates are political strategy by people who don't have your interests at heart. Cut through the crap, participate in the democratic process, and deal with the real issues.
The only place I've ever visited and seen tanks and machine guns around the airport is Heathrowe.
We in the US are correcting things, elected the Dems and Bush will be a memory in 2008. Everyone in the world says nothing gets done without us. The peace process, the environment, economy. You can say we are wrong when we are but then don't turn around and say "but we can do anything without the US". At least we lead always (even when it is wrong like Bush) but you guys are our lap dogs and follow (example Tony Blair).
In Soviet Russia you were legally obliged to have your passport with you at all times — although many weren't carrying it with them, that could was grounds for involuntary visit to the precinct...
Oh, and no, you could not leave the country with that passport — you needed a different, special one. An impossible one to receive for ordinary citizens, BTW.
Sad to see UK getting a step closer to that, but it is still very far away from it...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
I'm saying that powerful people actually change the rules, when they can, often to the detriment of others, which undermines the legal system's ability to protect everyone else.
I agree that we should be supporting and strengthening the legal system, but we have to be careful about how, and there are parts that we should be attacking. For example, Bush and Gonzales would say that that's what they're doing right now - supporting and strengthening the legal system to give them more power, so that they are better able to go after terrorists.
Don't generalize. The country where I was born, Portugal, has much more privacy than any of the countries you've mentioned in your post (including the US). Germany has an even larger degree of privacy. And, according to a study by Privacy International, USA is worse all the European countries except UK.
You should research a bit before posting your opinions!
The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
>That ought to at least buy you another couple of hundred years of relative freedom.
Another generation or two of muslims and you can kiss your relatives and freedoms goodbye.
Even the least virulent muslim groups in the UK are a pack of rabid dogs.
Where else can some nutcase call for the death of a person and then be knighted?
Where else can some foreign cleric come to London and discuss the sharia and the law at a seminar, comment on a rape victim (you know the usual, she was a whore for dressing that way) and then be compared to Mother Theresa by the PM?
If a person in country A wants to travel to country B, then country B is certainly justified in demanding assurances from country A that that person is not going to cause problems in country B. It is reasonable, therefore, that country A does a detailed background check and documents that background check; that can be either part of the passport application or part of a separate visa process. Furthermore, the nature and depth of that background check is largely determined by the requirements of country B. These requirements pretty universally include sufficient financial resources and an unblemished police record.
So, yes, the UK looks like it's turning into a surveillance state, but that's an internal matter in the UK, unrelated to either national IDs or the issuance of passports. Requiring background checks in order to travel to other countries is justified and unrelated. UK citizenship does not confer the right to travel to other countries, and other countries who consider the UK background checks unnecessary can still choose to admit you without a passport (like the nations of the EU do, for example).
Amazing that not many people in the world, even in the U.S., know that the U.S. instituted a you-can't-leave list with the passport reform law last January. If you are on the list, no matter what, you are not leaving the country, not by car, cruise ship, cargo ship, plane,foot, or train. Like the U.K, your country is your prison. And don't expect Canadians to help hide you, because entering while on that list is a crime, and they are now using our "criminal" lists to block entry; sneaking past the American wall would qualify you as a federal criminal, therefore your ass is being sent back to the Home of the Free.
Why did they bother with WW2, they should have just said to Hitler, we like what you do. Lets unite, no bloodshed, let the industrial complex grow.
j/k
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
The car surveillance is independent of the passport threat. We get that even if we opt out of the passport.
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
To get as much bad data into their database as we can.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
So, anyone submitting to these requirements can hope to become part of the Inner Party at some point, and those who do not become the proles?
Interesting that there is something resembling a choice there. I assume that my government in USA is doing all that without my "permission" or knowledge.
Paris, Moscow, Washington, Kuala Lumpur, Tokyo, Brussels, Hong Kong, Berlin, Jakarta, New York, Stockholm, Rome, Shanghai, Caracas, Copenhagen, Mexico City, Atlanta, etc.
THE WORLD HAS COLLAPSED
ONLY BRITAIN SOLDIERS ON
our written thoughts are gifts to our future selves
A passport is a request by your government for foreign nations and domestic agencies to safeguard your passage and extend you basic courtesies based on your nationality. By extension, they are also an assurance by your government that you will not abuse these privileges or in any way harm your host nation. How can your government make such an assurance if the only data they have on you is your name, address, and date of birth?
You guys are so fucked. Don't worry though, the U.S. is just one step behind the UK. Maybe we could do cross Atlantic revolution together? Won't that be fun?
-Dipster
Very true. What's the phrase - evil will triumph if good men do nothing?
I think the most important thing is to ensure that the judicial system is separate from the executive. This is the biggest threat at the moment, IMHO. Guantanamo, extroadinary rendition, trial without jury, etc.
Specific laws can be changed, but if the system permits laws to be flouted by those in charge, we're all pretty well doomed. Viva la revolucion!
I thought that the british helped the ira, and even heard stories that they forced some irish
1 869019,00.html
to bomb their own or be shot.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,,
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
And now the Americans want to build a fence along their southern border.
I used to carry a bottle of whiskey for snake bite. And two snakes. -Nefarious Wheel
I'm suprised that they ever allowed that kind of government control. It boggles the mind why you would ever give up your right to privacy.
Don't feel bad tho.. unless we do something soon, the people of America will be joining you guys soon as a fellow oppressed nation.
Bringing liberty to the masses. - http://freetalklive.com/
Enough. Whats to stop the complete control of individuals by government?
Our American history books are full of fairy tales, perhaps the entire idea of America is just another tale...
England hasn't changed. America strives to be modern England... Revolutionary wars, Civil Wars, Middle Class American dreams, Civil Rights, Racial Equality... World War 2....
meant nothing... apparently.
I'm sure glad all of our grandparents are dead today. Shame on all of us for allowing this stuff to continue.
Considering that as a demographic, I would expect Slashdot readers to be more concerned and aware of events like this than the average person, and that we're all sitting here debating the move's merits and making V for Vendetta jokes instead of, ya know, actually doing stuff, that they've played an expert hand.
Now as things get more and more extreme and your options for legal recourse become slimmer, people will start turning to terrorism, thereby (in thier minds) justifying the measures. Pretty slick for a group we put so much energy into making fun of.
You need more psychedelic art in your life. rhesusmonkey.deviantart.com
The Blair Project
http://www.escapeartist.com/Altos_Del_Maria/Mounta in_Garden.html
Cheap luxury houses for $40000, live tax free. Do what you like.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
The UK is home to some of the original ruling families of the world, joined long ago by the Rothschilds and other Jewish banking families. As the power of the global ruling families has grown -- and seen no reaction by "we the people" -- they are emboldened to treat their subjects more and more like slaves. Which, in general, is what the ruling families do anyway.
Of course a slave cannot leave his master's domain without permission from his master. And if the slave wants permission from his master, the master has to be able to review what the slave has been up to. For only good slaves get a boon from the master and receive permission to travel. Perhaps the slave is on an errand for his master. If not much, or heaven forbid, nothing, is known about the slave, then there must not be any good reason for the master to let that slave travel.
The real mastery of the rulers over the slaves, though, has been getting the slaves to pay for their own slavery. The slaves pay their taxes every year so that their slavery can endure. That is what happens with "generational slavery". The slaves are so used to being slaves, they forget.
This progression to more and more overt slavery will continue indefinitely. It will only be some outlying event, not on the rulers' radar, that will be able to change things. Maybe if an asteroid hits the planet or if one of the population control viruses goes haywire and kills 99% of the people on the planet, that sort of thing. Otherwise, for the slaves, go back to your television and wait for instructions from your master.
Source please?
That is not correct - this proposed rule only covers public carriers and I think was limited to air and sea, so you are free to leave by car or foot and maybe train. Also as far as I can tell it was never actually enacted, so it may not actually be in force at all. And the rule was proposed for January 2007.
USA would never admit that it spies on its citizens and sometimes send them to some more or less secret distant military base where no one is allowed to talk to the prisoners - Especially not people from terrorist-states like the EU ("terrorist state" is of course defined as a place where the respect for the human rights and democracy is better than in USA. That is: Everywhere except a few of USA's allies.).
The biggest problem with spying on the citizens is actually that the citizens have to be able to spy back. You might think it's horrible that everyone can find out everything about you, but it's only open for massive misuse if you can't spy back.
Two world wars have bled Brits dry of spirit. Their secret services assassinate at will up to and including their own Princess. Hey they like 'royals', not I. To me, so called royals are and have been historically syphillitic
parasites on an already poor society. Look at who owns what in England. The d___ned queen and her adherants own a large chunk of all real estate there, and produce the cigarettes that you smoke. Yes, they are merchants of death
to the whole world through the Brit American Tobacco group that they have a controlling interest in. The brit government spies on everyone, and this latest outrage is not for 'security' at all, but for profit for its royals an allied businesses in 'tawdry old england' and abroad. These royals even maintain an island personally owned by the ugly old hag called 'Suck....I mean Sauk'. On 'suck' the royals excercise absolute power unchanged from the time of the middle ages. That this criminal family has not used this power at least openly recently changes nothing. The fact is that they can. Right now they use this island as a place for favored corporations to escape brit taxes and launder drug and other illegal profits, leaving the brit taxpayer to bear the whole load to clean up all the messes their big businesses create, and to die in wars benefiting these corporations. Now this spiritless mass of apathetic slobs had their weapons taken away without so much as a wimper. In fact, the fools seemed to glory in the rape of their rights. They are the true home of the radical pacifist. In fact, vacation camps exist there where brits go to pay to be tortured and beaten the stuffins out of...and the camps are popular. The suckers go back year after year! Homosexuality is rife among the upper classes. Soon we will hear about the reimposition of indentured servitude en-masse in the place....followed by other more open slavery.
The only chance they have will be if the large Arab and other Moslem minority in the country gains electable strength in critical areas such that they take over places like central London. The brits dare not regulate the Arabs. They will never take all their guns away, and the guns they do take will be replaced before the takers even drive away. They dare not challenge Sharia when it comes to place after place. They are too cowardly to actually go up against a people with a will to fight. The authorities took the guns away from the brit people for a reason...to later enslave them, and because they could! Weak and worthless people always find their way to slavery. The Irish knew better, they refused to go along. The Irish are free today. Not so the English. If the Scots have any spirit left, they will leave this nest of naziism and its jackbooted, coal bucket helmeted petty bourgeous mafiosi to rot in its own juices. There is a reason that we Americans revolted against these people two hundred years ago.
We should have left Hitler to have them. Where brits go in Iraq are places that are really safe. The brits in Iraq are protected by the Shias. When brits went into Bosnia, they ran away from every battle with their tails between their legs. The only reason that the so called 'allies' got in is that the Croats chased away the American allies Karadzich and Milosevich and the rest of the Serbs. Brits did not want to fight Serbs. Serbs kicked the Austrians asses by the hundreds of thousands in the first world war, and the thought of fighting Serbs makes the average brit pee in his pants. Brits in Bosnia are only in safe areas protected by we Americans. The only casualties brits had in the first Iraq dust up was when they wandered in front of our tankfire out of sheer stupidity. Sitting on the outside, the rest of the world will have a front row seat to see the brit leaders
emulate Kim Jong Il. The EU ought to kick the brits out. Or maybe a couple million or so Moldovan prostitutes
will go there to sell their services to brit government officials....like the Profumo scandal years ago.
Maybe the Moldovans will blackmail those officials and get the brit peoples' liberties back. Only thing brit officials like better than money is their hypocrisy, and it would be just 'bad form' to be 'caught with their knickers down.......
I see a huge business opertunity here for blackmarket british passports. That, an creating fake backgrounds for real passports.
Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification
Yes, of course, there are differences in European politics. However you have to understand the point I am making is that there is no real Socialist state in Europe. There are political parties that say they are socialist, but truthfully it is not purely so. The fact is that Americans think "Socialism" is something evil on level with Communism (of the Soviet facist kind). And there is no DDR or SED any more.
To expect them to understand the difference between the relatively "market friendly" politics of Social-Democrats in Europe is too much. Just like you said "in very many areas" - and in the others?
I live in Scandinavia and we have our radical socialists too - in the minority. The powerful Labour parties that govern Europe have long since changed too much to deserve the name and content Americans would associate with "Socialism".
...General strike!
If enough British people care enough about an issue, they can strike en masse and paralyse the country. If the Government doesn't back down, they can stay out on strike. If the government still doesn't back down, and the people stay out on strike, then HRM QE2 can dissolve Parliament and call fresh elections.
Problem is that the British people seem to lack provokability. Fear of making waves. Addiction to the status quo. Conformity seems to be hardwired into the British psyche.
Also, there's a fallacy of composition - if 20 thousand people go on strike, they'll soon start having a problem with the police. But if 20 million people go on strike, and stay on strike, then the police (and government whom they represent) will soon have a major problem with *them*. But you won't get twenty million people out on strike, because each one of these twenty million people thinks that he/she is the only one who really gives a damn.
-- In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was UNSIGNED, and the main(){} was without form and void...
I think you have to read my other posts here as well. The point is that the "Socialism" of the Soviet Era does not exist in Europe any longer. We have Social-Democracy and leftist political parties - but they have long since changed and adapted to a new reality. They can be very progressive and relatively market friendly if they want to - and some really have been and are.
Emigrate.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
As a fully-fledged passport-holding UK citizen, I would like to say that I wholeheartedly agree with my government's policy on surveillance; privacy is not a right - it's a nuisance. I also agree with all curent and future policies of this government and will certainly be voting Labour come the next general election.
Before I start; I am a nub on law and debating...and typing and spelling and grammar and, and ... whatever ... Also! I cba reading any of the linked articles, the Slashdot summaryt pissed me right off.
So first off, if I apply for a passport, what forms do I need to fill in? Where on those forms does it say "You must give up your bank, tax, blah details." In addition to this point, what's stopping the powers that be from investigating dodgy applicants? In other words, why cant they use the RIP (can't remember the acronym) legislation that came into effect not so long ago. Old news? The powers that be already have access to your bank account, benefits and tax details. I honestly believe you a bit daft to think otherwise. If you already bypass measures against abuse in this area, you have nothing to worry about not getting a passport.
To the best of my knowledge, there's no system in place at the minute to record car travel movement in the UK. Sure, there's lots of talk about it (maybe even a few trials that I might not know about), but it tends to lean towards insurance companies tracking high risk drivers. As for speed/traffic cameras that's a totally different topic.
We 'Brits' may be the most spied on nation in Europe. But honestly, I don't walk out the house, looking over my shoulder thinking "omg, I'm being watched."
If Britons are the most spied-upon citizens in Europe, why on earth is the passport office asking for consent?
You asked what checks and balances the system can provide against abuse by those in power.
:-) ). But for a mature person or population, giving away one's power is not a good idea - it stops the maturational process, and thus the tendency to give one's power away needs to be excised if the organism is to continue to develop.
That question presupposes that the population giving away their power is a reasonable act. It's not.
Well, for an infantilized population of course it is, in the same way it's good to not let the kids have either the keys to the car or the gun/liquor cabinet (we have combo units here in America!
So in the funny inverse world of the unconscious (where most behavior originates), it's precisely the abuse of power that causes the healing to begin. One wouldn't want to prevent it (and thankfully one can't).
It's much like a chick pecking its way out of an egg. The eggshell, which once protected the chick, must at some point be outgrown. But it's the struggle to break free of the shell that develops the strength in the chick that it needs to feed itself - without that very struggle the chick will soon die. And so for a population it's the struggle to break free of power - triggered by "abuse" - that develops within it the strength to wield that power and govern itself.
Of course, this cycles through generations, as one can see in the original American Revolution and the upcoming one.
So what from the viewpoint of the immature child is seen as abuse is also from the holos of it the healing, restorative force that allows the child to live independently of the parent. And the rebellion which threatens the parent is also the force which frees the parent from the vampire-like clutches of the child. The force hurts them both. And it frees them both.
Our glass isn't half-empty or half-full. It's half-empty and half-full. Even more than that, really. It simply...is.
(That's why in Judeo-Christianity God, when asked his name, says "I am." Wholeness, unity, divinity, infinity, simply...is.)
Our only decision is would we be willing to feel both sides at once, to feel the abuse as felt by the child, the attack as felt by the parent, appreciate both for how they work together in sacred partnership for the benefit of the whole, and still play our role in it all.
It's at that point that we escape samsara. But not because the cycle stops.
We escape samsara because we no longer see life as samsara.
Namaste, everyone.
You swore an oath to defend against enemies foreign and "DOMESTIC." It comes down to how the government defines "all enemies, foreign and domestic."
"I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
Well, as most countries will not give you one if you have varying types of criminal records, as well as other criteria, I'd say it's more that just those three things that you need.
Further to that, how much do they need. It is important to Canada (as an example destination) that a British citizen deposited $x in his bank account every month, and regularly purchased toilet paper from Supermarket Y? Why do they need bank records
Are tax records important? I'd assume that the government has most of this already, but is it anyways necessary for anyone in Hawaii to know when you vacation there?
And how the fuck is car movement information going to guarantee you're a good citizen?
None of this shit is going to very useful in catching terrorists. Out of millions of people, they might be able to accumulate data that said "Bob's bank records say he bought fertilizer from the hardware store, drove his car to a woodsy area, his wife is missing, and he's taking a holiday out-of-country." Of course, it might be that Bob's wife left to visit her aunt in Germany, he bought trees at a tree-lot near a woodsy area, and fertilizer from the store, now he's off to join his wife.
It's useless, and it's bullshit. There's no safe way to corroborate this information without shitloads of false positives. That's thousands of citizens who are going to suffer undue persecution. Ad that to the terrorists that are moving outside of the normal channels anywhere, and it's not doing a damn thing to safeguard or assure anything.
The government will happily be hunting down RaHindle D Arab while John K Smith is happily boarding a plane with an wad of nitro-glycerine in his stomach and an igniter up his ass.
You've never been to Tijuana, have you?
You can enter Mexico without ever encountering (or seeing!) an authority figure.
is that a truly free country does NOT assume its citizens are criminals, the people are "innocent until proven guilty!" A free and innocent person, not convicted of anything to prevent the acquisition of a passport, should thus be treated with courtesies and safe passage. A government that assumes otherwise of its citizens, as Britain does, is evil.
A social security system depends on the support of the middle (the worker) class. Not the rich and not the poor but that large majority in the middle.
If they think social security benefits them (directly, because they think they might one day need it themselves, or indirectly because they think it makes a better society for them to live in).
Sweden is a country were, so far, the population clearly believes a strong social security system is to the benefit of all AND therefore continue to support it.
The US is clearly a country were the majority doesn't believe it, and so it has a weak social security system
The point here is NOT a debate about who is right but that wichever system is chosen depends on the majority vote, the middle worker class usually, willing to support it.
I think the same is true of 'privacy'. The simple fact is that no matter how hard some people attempt to shout, a lot of people just don't seem to think it is a big deal.
I think that the privacy/bigbrother level of a country is going to depend on what the middle working class believes is right for them. Not that I am saying they are "right" in anyway.
Goverments, especially goverments that like to be elected will therefore follow the vote of that middle class. They are not going to list to fringe nutcases on either side because fringes don't have enough votes.
There is however a problem, the middle class tends to stay silent, they have better things to do then organize protest rallies or post on forums. A good politician must be able to tell apart a mass of voters from a small group that just happens to make a lof of noise.
From daily experience I just don't see all the much concern about bigbrother in the "common" man. If anything I see a great amount of concern about to much freedom. One in the netherlands at the moment is about TBS (It is a sentence given to a criminal who is consdered mentally ill, apart from a regular prison sentence (fixed maximum time according to human rights laws) the prisoner also has to report for treatment. In theory this only ends AFTER the patient is cured. This could lead, and has, to a person being send to 10 years and then spending the rest of their lives in a mental hospital (this is against human rights as you need to be told the length of your sentence, this is a lifesentence without being told).
So are the people upset about this, that the state can just pro-long the sentence of a human for as long as they can find a shrink to call him mentally ill?
No, in fact, the system is under attack because patients who are let out on leave commit serious crimes and people want them to be locked up permanntly.
You also hear loud voices about traffic camera's, yet the major complaint from real people is about people who speed and other traffic assholes.b Could it be the anti-speed camera is just very loud and the real "middle class" thinks they are a good idea? Some polls suggest this.
We will have to see what the brits think about this, england has regular elections so they can send a signal to the goverment every couple of years.
Will they? Does the man on the street, really care? I think not. He might be wrong in this but that is not the issue, the issue is what the majority will vote for. Doesn't help that england effectivly is a one party country.
You have to remember one thing, england is the place of london, I believe the first the place in the world to have congestion charging (you pay for using the road at peak times). It was widely believed to be political suicide. Until one man dared to introduce it, he succeeded, it worked and the plan has been extended and is going to get a whole new level on top AND he has been relected. Despite ALL the extremely loud fringe groups claiming it was going to be a disaster.
I have learned to stop paying attention to what some people shout and instead am trying to hear what a lot of people are NOT saying. Until the majority says NO to bigbrother it will happen, because apparently the majority thinks it is good for them. Right or wrong they might be, but they are not going to be swayed by people shouting loudly, they never have and they never will.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
We (Europe) declare to give away the UK to the US for it is much more similar to the US than it is to Europe. We would greatly appreciate it if you could also relocate the UK physically away from the continent a.k.a. Europe. Thank you. We apologize for it to not having much Oil at all but at least they constitute good American citizens, willing to give away essential freedoms for a false sense of security any minute, as well as they do support wars for the sole reason of others possessing Oil.
In Soviet Union they were listed as "NE VYEZDNYE" by KGB.
O wonder!
How many goodly creatures are there here!
How beautious mankind is!
O brave new world,
That has such people in't!
What exactly is it you think we learn in Basic and, for that matter, the rest of our time in the service? It's to do as we are ordered, when we're ordered to do it.
Every aspect of military life is about inculcating the reflexive acceptance of orders. The sarge says jump, you jump. You don't ask how high, because you do not question your superiors.
I can tell you right now that if I or my servicemen were ordered to open fire on a civilian demonstration, we'd do it, even if it were women and children. Not because we want to, but because we were ordered to.
When the guy said "I vas just obeyink mein orderz!" he wasn't kidding. A lot of the people accused of atrocities (and probably guilty of them) really were just doing as they'd been trained to do: obey orders.
If you want to change that, you'll have to dismantle the military.
Ah Queen Liz, that nice old lady who wishes us a Merry Christmas on TV each year...
Give me hard statistics of significant legislation she's vetoed during the Blair regime and I'll concede she wields any real power.
I have been wondering for a while, what is the general opinion within the IRA and/or Real IRA regarding the 911 and London subway/bus attacks?
Were they looked upon as being the atrocities that they were? Did the attacks and subsequent public outcry casue a change in policy for the IRA?
I know that this is way off topic, but I've been curious about something for quite a while. I've tried searching for this info off and on over the last couple of years...with no luck. There's no ulterior motive to my questioning..it's really just pure curiosity, from an American guy who sort of took an interest in the goings on back in the 80's.
I'm hoping that someone from the UK or Ireland can answer this for me here or provide a link or two. Thanks in advance.
Huh?
You do realize you're one of us, right?
"the Americans", "their southern border"...
Or are you also one of those people who refers to themselves in the 3rd person?
I've read that in many cities in England, especially London, you can't walk outside without being on a camera. Once you allow that kind of constant surveillance it is just a step away from having all your information monitored all the time anyway.
Living in the USA, when I first watched Torchwood I initially didn't beelive how easily they were able to track people on cameras so easily, then I remembered that such an ability real and not one of the scifi elements of the show.
http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
Given the fact that most British citizens strongly oppose further abuse of power and illegal spy programs, it is time that the people stand up and finally implement true democracy in Great Britain.
England - Das Viertes Reich !
With regards to people taking antidepressants because their lives aren't perfect, I always found that rather funny.
Regular antidepressants (the ones you'll get coverage for in an outpatient setting) don't actually have mood-brightening properties, and many are a bit passivizing. Virtually all of them have some pretty nasty side-effects. So they're perfectly useless for people whose lives just aren't perfect. It makes sense that some people get prescribed antidepressants by ignorant doctors without knowing that they'd be better off with a piece of candy, but I haven't seen any hard numbers on this.
As for major depression, where these drugs have an indirect mood-brightening effect by reducing the depressive symptoms (just as a cure for cancer would have definite mood-brightening effects on the people who have cancer), these doesn't necessarily have anything to do with your life not being perfect. And they do entail your life being, in slashspeak, "teh suck". More so than anyone who hasn't had it, or lived every day for a long time with someone who does, are able to comprehend.
That's kind of been my guide to evaluating whether someone should be on one or not: if the adverse reactions and/or side-effects are something they can't handle, even if the drug has an effect, then they shouldn't be using antidepressants in the first place. It just isn't serious enough to merit treatment, and they need to build coping skills instead, or see a lifestyle guide, or possibly go to therapy (or their priest or whatnot, which does as much good as regular therapy, studies say).
Personally, I've had side-effects that a modern person would consider debilitating by themselves, as well as adverse reactions that were grounds for hospitalization (e.g. circulatory collapse). I still don't see it as a problem: the baseline is worse than even the worst adverse reactions. Compare with cancer patients who get to puke their guts out, lose their hair and suffer lots of pain... if there is any chance of getting better, they generally don't cut the chemo or whatnot.
If I were Venezuelan, the whole Chavez thing would really have me pretty frightened. Admittedly, Chavez isn't Hitler -- frankly, I don't think he's that talented, and Venezuela isn't anything like the industrial power that Germany was in the '30s, for starters -- but it's pretty hard not to start drawing comparisons when he starts getting "enabling" laws passed by a rubberstamp legislature, just like, well, you know who. The rhetoric is a bit different, but they're both going after the same support base (and largely succeeding) by demonizing outsiders. Actually, Chavez has something of an easier time than the NSDAP did, because while the Nazis were in the unenviable position of having to distinguish themselves both from more capitalist countries like the U.K. and U.S., they also had to differentiate themselves from Soviet-style socialism and communism. Chavez doesn't; by positioning himself on the left wing, he can simply blame everyone right of him, without having to find any middle ground.
I hope anyone with any brains at all has seen the writing on the wall and headed for the border, because I think it's going to get a lot worse there before it gets better.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Because half of them are Mexican.
As an American, I see that particular facet of our culture more as a sign of our irrationality than anything else, although I guess that a total absence of any desire to change culture or civilization for the better would be if anything more depressing.
As usual, there is a happy medium in there somewhere, which I think in the U.S. we generally overshoot. As someone said here on Slashdot, the problem with the "Something Must Be Done" philosophy, is that it lends itself too easily to "this is something, therefore, it must be done." People will do things, simply for the sake of doing them, even if they're not productive (or counter-productive). They are so preoccupied with doing that they don't think about the long term effects, or even the efficacy, of what's being done. It's all about looking busy and covering your ass.
Obviously it's not good if hundreds of people get food poisoning at a restaurant, and everyone who's in a position to do something about it just shrugs and says "hey, that's life." But just as obviously, it ought to be clear that it's counterproductive to have a reaction that's disconnected either logically or in scope, with the original event. And too often, that's what we do here. We seem to go after things that have the appearance or 'gut feeling' of being helpful, but without really thinking about them too hard.
Somewhere between catatonia (not giving a shit) and mania (caring too much, to the point where there's not time to think about what should really be done), there's got to be a better way.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
I actually believe that the majority of the population in the UK is more or less centre right. A lot of people are embarrassed by this (as it is sooo unfashionable), so they would never even admit it to themselves, let alone others, so they have tacitly allowed centre right government for almost 30 years. I know way too many people who claim to be left leaning but when they say what they actually believe in it sounds like a Conservative party manifesto. If the population wasn't mostly centre right then somebody would have stepped into the vacuum. The LibDems try to fill that void, but they only have fairly minor success - they don't really have much in the way of actual policy, their success mostly rests on people's total disgust of the main parties behaviour as opposed to any strong political beliefs.
FWIW, as an American who has spent a substantial amount of time in GB, this seems to have the ring of truth to it. Now, it's possible that people I talked to (and I didn't normally make a point of talking politics, particularly of late), knowing that I was an American, held a more conservative line when with me than they really believed, but on multiple occasions, I'd talk with people in a pub and hear a lot of things that sounded basically moderate/conservative (in the U.S., I'd say they'd fall into that vague category of 'socially liberal but economically slightly conservative' -- e.g., annoyed at government intrusiveness and waste, annoyed at high taxes, annoyed at redistributive programs, bitching about the NHS), but then see the same people later on holding much more Liberal positions in public. So there definitely seems to be some, as you put it, taboos about being conservative or holding conservative opinions, that keep people from voicing them in public.
I don't think this is by any means a British phenomenon; there are definitely parts of the U.S. where being an "out" Republican is social suicide, but where Republicans have been successfully elected, meaning that more than a few people are talking one thing at cocktail parties and pulling a very different lever in the voting booth.
I've never done any research in this vein, but it strikes me as probably being true historically as well; it's often socially advantageous to be seen as avant garde, "progressive," or "forward thinking" in public, but in the privacy of their own minds and consequently in the voting booth, people tend to be much more cautious and thus conservative. Perhaps it's because, knowing why they act the way they do, they have to wonder who's really a true believer, and who else is just putting on the beret in order to get laid.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
are the new Jews. Give history a little time to repeat itself.
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
Some of the other respondents have gotten pretty close, I think, but I just wanted to add my thoughts on the train business.
The reason the trains running on time thing is so important, is because it's a hard problem. Like, really terrifically hard. If you can have a national railroad, in a country of significant size, run predictably on time, that's a clear demonstration that you Have Your Shit Together. It means you can manage the logistics of having enough trains and personnel to take up the slack if something happens to one train, plus you have the overseeing bureaucracy to coordinate it all from the top down. And when a country Has Its Shit Together, it is probably also a force to be reckoned with, economically and militarily. It's a sign, in other words, that as a nation, you have made it to the big leagues.
Or at least it was, in the early 20th century. Now, I'm not sure if people would see it as being quite as impressive now as it once was, because it's not as clear that it's quite so hard a problem. Prior to computers, it probably seemed pretty amazing to pick up a timetable (presumably printed a few weeks in advance), and know, with absolute certainty, that a train would actually show up at the platform at the time that was written on the sheet. It implied a vast amount of coordination in order to do that, which any educated person could appreciate. Today, I think it's still impressive, but there are other things that a modern visitor is going to look for in a nation and use as a comparison bar, in deciding whether they're in someplace Civilized or not. (Such as, can I use my Amex here / get Internet service / distance from a major airport / etc.)
For various historical reasons, railroads in the United States never were the source of the same nationalistic pride that they were (and to a limited extent still are) in Europe. If a train ran on time, it was less a reflection of the nation and/or its underlying work ethic, than of the company running it. I suspect at the height of the railroad wars that there was intense competition to keep trains running on time, particularly high-profile ones, simply as a matter of corporate pride and as an advertising advantage. But it wasn't really a reflection of the nation or the government in power at the time, except in an indirect sense.
As a sidenote, the last time I was in Germany, I noted that at least in the bigger train stations, they still had clocks on the platforms that are synchronized together down to the second, which even to a modern geek strikes me as pretty cool. I don't know how they work, but they must all be like stepper motors, slaved together. All the hands, including the second hand, "tick" at the same time. Struck me as a little OCD, but in a good way. (And there do seem to be different standards within the rail systems in Europe on tardiness. I used to be able to haul ass and predictably make 2-minute connections on DB, but when I tried that coming in from Belgium, I missed the connection by 10 seconds and was left, in a crowd of 30 or 40 other people, watching the German train pull out without waiting. They don't mess around.)
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
wytcld -- your response is classic Joseph Goebbels propaganda, and shows clearly how Muslims are indeed the New Jews. "Some have misbehaved, lets kill all of them." Second, what makes you think Muslims in general "tolerate" suicide bombers? Do Americans "tolerate" George Bush's widespread plundering of the middle east? Do Americans "tolerate" Foreign Affairs' call that a civil war in Iraq could be "good"? Do Jews tolerate that 6 year kids are shot in the back and killed after protesting their house being demolished? NO -- I just dont think the majority of people can do anything about these war crimes, just as the majority of Americans and Jews have not done anything about their own ranks committing war crimes. And of course, this puts aside the fact that far more killing, stealing, and plundering is done by non-Muslims (think Vietnam and Iraq war 2003, two of 40 examples that come to mind.)
I live next door to an elementary school. Let's imagine that one day, I decide to kill a few dozen kids with a banana. Will the government ban bananas?
(with apologies to John Cleese)
Why all the constant UK bashing from American posters? It's the US that is driving this nonsense after all. You know, the country that first started photographing and fingerprinting all foreign nationals entering the land of the free?
The U. S. Department of State says this:
The United States government does not have exit controls at the border. There is no way to stop someone with valid travel documents at the United States border. The U.S. government does not check the names or the documents of travelers leaving the United States. Many foreign countries do not require a passport for entry. A birth certificate is sufficient to enter some foreign countries.
But that's now obsolete. Now there's the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative:
Here's the Federal Register reference. The first phase (the "air phase") is already in place; the second phase (the "sea and land phase") may require further Congressional approval.
And he will not be able to BUY sell or Trade without the mark.
First step folks.
Dunno where you are getting your information, but when you enter Mexico by foot, you don't have to talk to anyone nor show ID to anyone. The Mexican government doesn't appear to give a rat's ass who ENTERS their country by foot. You also don't have to talk to a single US Customs person. So I dunno how they are going to prevent anyone on this "list" from leaving.
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
there's a lot of muslims in England.
Yes, I'm logged in as A/C (emphasis on coward).
Power attracts corruption, we all know it..
With these kinds of systems in place, and the inevitable increase in use of them, there will be many more opportunities for corrupt groups to place agents in places where they can hurt innocent people that cross their business.
Political parties have also been proven to be willing and able to deal blows below the belt.
The emergence of the surveillance society will be like a specialized weapon for use against the knee or crotch.
The economic super-class of the world has many governments partially in it's pockets through lobbying and campain-contributions. With this kind of surveillance infrastructure and it's many entry-points, their options for blackmailing politicians increase manyfold.
It's got me worried..
Rail systems in Europe were subsidized long before anyone took global warming seriously.
I guess there are many reasons, rail users as a pressure group, a preference to collective solutions over individual solutions, a genuine concern about those unfit to driving cars, local environmental concerns, more tradition for urban planning (what kind of cities do we want), and our cities in general being much older and not geared to cars as the primary transportation form.
Todays Labour is significantly more right wing than the conservatives were 30 years ago.
Britain must be number one, the best! Make way for the new English Democratic Republic (EDR). We intend to take off from where the East Germans left off http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi.
Well, the dirty linen is now out, a US drivers License is not a license, and a UK passport is not a passport - both are identity documents over and above requirements, and money raked off to subsidize somebody's pet project. The biometric information is not to confirm the same person going out is the same one coming back in, but to add to a dossier for each comrade in the new EDR.
Voluntary? When the government abrogates basic social responsibilities, like health, social security payments, then it is compulsory. Hell, why not invite them in for 'psych interviews'
Pushing all the bullshit aside, potential baddies in the UK don't need no stinkin passport. And the suss-types coming in on foreign passports from dodgey countries will probably be less hassled. Just more security theater at great cost, for little or no gain.
A passport is a very important document and it is sensible that people should have to provide documentation to help provide proof of who they are. Having an interview for adults wanting to apply for their first passport is a sensible step in providing that proof. The form of this interview is not an interrogation but is actually more like a chat to make sure the person who is physically sitting there is the person the documentation says they are. For example questions may be asked about their parents, place of birth, their salary, where they work, how long they've had their bank account and what bank, what car they own etc. All of these bits of information are potentially easy to find but for an impostor to learn all of the possible correct responses especially when the nature of the questions is randomised takes a lot of effort. I can certainly imagine that there are many question I could be asked that I find easy to know but an impostor would find it harder to remember all of them correctly.
:)
The identification processes involved in researching a passport will already have noted these bits of information as part of the normal process of their background checks. For example the national insurance card number ( http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/nic/ynino.htm#b ) links a lot of information about tax from employment, where people live, pension contributions, what social security benefits they have. The driver's license will tell the passport office what cars people own and what cars they are insured to drive. The birth certificate says who their parents are, obviously.
The article doesn't make sense because it links a whole load of unrelated points and tries to link them together by providing unfounded comments. Someone getting a passport should have to prove their identity however it doesn't have much to do with bank records and tax records in the negative way the article implies with all of its hand waving about "People who refuse to give up...". It's actually more of a rant against the government rather than a coherent argument.
Martin Piper
Owner - ReplicaNet and RNLobby
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
The IRA would give warnings (usually coded, and largely useless) before many of their attacks, IIRC they claimed their primary aim was to destroy property, not people (though they didn't care much if people were caught up). This causes just as much terror, but when people died they can do as the military does and label it collateral damage (I don't think they ever used that term, but the sentiment was the same). So things like the 11\09\01 attack were condemned by their political wing (Sinn Fein) immediately. However this was no surprise as the peace process was well under way by the time of 11\09\01 and the IRA had been under ceasefire for quite a few years.
If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
The point is prevention. I would prefer people didn't want to get drunk and have a fight on a Saturday night. The only way that will ever happen is if there is a massive shift in our society.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I found the Socialist Democratic Party in Denmark to be too right-leaning for me. Quite annoying really, because they are the most left-leaning party that ever gets prime ministers elected here. (Well, at least in latter years)
In mine, making a proportionate, considered and effective response is. Simply doing the first thing that comes to mind with great fuss and fanfare indicates hysterical ninnies.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
The worker (majority) class is at the bottom, not the middle. Decisions at the top are made largely without their input, except when they get organized and apply pressure.
The middle consists of half-rich folks, such as doctors, lawyers, and programmers. These are the people the majority of whom support shoving cameras up everybody's ass, all the time.
At present you can travel without passport from UK mainland to Northern Ireland (if you don't fly Ryanair). From there you can cross the border to the Republic of Ireland without a passport. You can live and work there freely if you are a UK subject (you'll possibly need ID to prove this if your prospective employer doesn't believe you, or the immigration people get onto you - very unlikely - they are ill-equipped), and so you can stay long enough to get citizenship. UK and Ireland haven't signed the EU agreements on cross-border pursuit by police due to how shall we say, regional sensitivities.
Problem solved.
If you're from NI or your parents/grandparents are Irish, even easier, just get an Irish passport.
-- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
It's not really a problem. You can either stay landlocked in Britain, rejecting surveillance, or you can accept surveillance and get the hell outta there!
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Is that because pre-entry clearing is going to be done in the US, just as pre-entry to the US by air from Canada is done in Canada (so passengers arrive in a domestic arrivals terminal)?
"so I call FUD on general principal"
Actually, when they wanted the driving license to become an identity card, they forced you on renewal for any reason (mine was change of address) to submit your passport details and a photograph.
Failure to do so and they would not return your old driving license. I was pissed off at that, it was a backdoor ID card, something that had already been voted down.
Fucking Blair.
Ireland and the UK share a free travel area, exclusive of the Schengen agreement.
It is a well accepted fact here in Ireland that if the UK introduces mandatory identity cards, the Republic of Ireland would have to follow suit in the interests of maintaining the privileged position we have with respect to travel to the UK. The British are by European standards quite paranoid about border control but, Irish and UK citizens can travel within the UK & Ireland sans passport. This free travel area with the UK is of enormous benefit to the Irish economy, clearly.
Thus if the Blair/Brown government does indeed start to place tough requirements on obtaining a UK passport this means that defacto such a system will be introduced in Ireland, in order to guarantee Ireland can maintain it's privileged access to the UK border
The Irish government would no doubt claim that they *have no choice* and that, of course it's not their fault... it's Tony Blair's fault.... if we, the Irish government don't spy on you to British standards... we might have difficulty traveling to London and Manchester for our stag parties, football games and occasional golfing sessions...
Solution: Grow your hair, buy a log cabin in the mountains and a shot-gun and go wait for *the day* the "Feds" come calling... trying to take your fingerprints for your "biometric" passport.
He seems to be calling him on context, whether correctly discerned or not.
I personally think mentioning of a wall in the United States has nothing to do with the intrusion of privacy that is at the heart of the British matter. Not being able to travel is but a symptom of that problem.
I wonder if they'll not find these steps insufficient and then push for individual tracking. And, that if their people will not submit to individual tracking, then they cannot do something else, like buy or sell anything. Sound familiar? Does this sound more plausible in light of these British plans? (I don't mean to challenge you but to ask a retorical question.)
Also, I wonder if terrorism is what has fueled this dangerous direction they have taken.
In Modern-day Britain, not long ago, I remember lots of suspected football hooligans being stopped from leaving the country to watch the world soccer tournament in Germany, with or without their passports.
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
The question is, what is the initial and yearly cost of the new system. Does anybody knows the numbers on that?
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
Just Think Brits!
No more carrying around a wallet or id, just have someone put an electronic wand to your bum,
and there it is!
Your shopping is paid for!
Your flight seat is reserved!
You are permitted to exit your own bedroom!
Rectal RFID Implant Chips are cheap - but that doesn't mean that Rectal RFID Implant Chips are a good idea.
Where the hell does one group of people think they can tell every group of people where they can travel?
Welcome to the British Prison State, where you don't leave home. Ever. Stupid Fascist Criminals.
When do they start up the death camps outside of London to remove 'surplus' populations?
Good use of pop cultural memes.
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
The pressure for such total information awareness is really coming from the US administration who sees the best defence against the terrorist threat to establish a buffer zone between it and what it sees as the gap, parts of the world where pax Americana can never be established. Of course it's ironic that in the quest for the defence of 'democracy' us here in the core will actually have to give up our own freedoms. And there is a flaw in such a strategy in that the 'disruptive perturbations' won't necessarly stay behide the firewall and uniteral action will shrink the gap.
.. I dub the former countries the Functioning Core of globalization, the latter the Non-Integrating Gap'
'As globalization deepens and spreads, two groups of states are essentially pitted against one another: countries seeking to align their internal rule sets with the emerging global rule set
Of course there is another reading of the terrorist threat agenda. That being after the end of the cold war, the US needed a new pretext for militarily occupying those areas of the planet where it has a vital resources. It also gives the state a pretext for spying on its own citizens. To do that you have to get the people scared and keep them scared.
Yes I know there are real terrorists, but we here in the UK have been subjected to acts at least on par with 9/11. Two of the worst were Lockerbie and the attempt to assassinate the entire UK Cabinet. But the gov never saw fit to cancel democracy. How can you defend freedom by giving it up.
davecb5620@gmail.com
Two reasons:
Redundancy. The more laws there are saying you can collect this information, the more laws there are that would have to be repealed in order to stop the collection of this information.
Permission. If the laws do get changed, there will probably be a legal loophole somewhere that says that if you specifically agreed to allow surveillance, they can keep doing so until you specifically tell them to stop. This means that if you ever got a passport between when this law went into effect, and what it was repealed, you would have to take the time to track down and fill out an unknown number of forms. Without a national mass-media announcement or mailing to everyone who has such a passport, the vast majority of the population would never even learn these forms existed. Also, don't discount laziness here - 90% of the population would never bother to fill those forms out, even if they knew about them.
How are we going to set that up?
Oh, and when the Bill of Rights of 1688 is so thoroughly rejected,it is to be called Oceana, not Britain.
30 years of terrorist activity from the IRA didn't require ID cards or this level of snooping, don't bother saying "what about the London underground bombings?" either, they were all Brits.
This is being done because they can and the civil service have always wanted to.
It's a bitch but who you vote for will make no difference until a political party will shoot 75% of the civil service and make the other 25% do a proper days work.
In the end, It's all bovine dung you know
In the united States, because of Diebold, we don't even need 20%.
Cheers
* Carthago Delenda Est *
You really misread the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative.
US citizens (and non-citizens) will be required to present a passport (or other acceptable documentation) to ENTER the USA, not to leave.
The USA does not control who leaves the country, only those who enter.
The documents required by another country (Canada, Mexico, Bermuda, etc) for US citizens to enter is entirely determined by that other country.
The USA is giving you fair warning that if you leave the USA without a passport, returning to the USA will be difficult.
Yes, but his blog (see his link) clearly states that he's from the US.
.. neither the politicians would.
Hey ABG :)
I got my submission accepted! How excellent is that?
In case you hadn't noticed, the current Labour government were elected by only about 22% of the population, thanks to our bizarre first-past-the-post system. (It was only around 1/3 of those who actually voted, and actually lost the popular vote in England, for the record.)
Needs to be added that the war-criminal only won because the other 2 parties were headed up by an alcohol and Michael Howard (for the Americans, the joke is that people don't need to be reminded why they wouldn't vote for Howard). And the alcholic never really had a chance in the same way that Nader didn't.
Please understand this: the current government is toast. They have been toast since almost the day they won that "historic third term" based on dubious election mechanics. They have no integrity, and no accountability until the next general election, which could still be several years away. Their only concern at this point is to entrench as much of their abusive policy as possible and cement Blair's "legacy" before they are kicked out. It's like having a five-year lame duck government running the show. What does a lame duck administration care about protests? There is no mechanism for the people to remove them from power early, and they have zero chance of securing a fourth victory, so protests don't matter to them at all.
I guess it depended who won the Tory leadership election. But Orwellian tendencies were obvious in this Govt ever since RIPA.
On a side note, I'm still amazed that people use "terrorism" as a scaremongering tactic instead of considering to be a criminal act.
It makes me wonder about the motives of ANYONE who uses the word nowadays.
Ben
You really misread the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative. US citizens (and non-citizens) will be required to present a passport (or other acceptable documentation) to ENTER the USA, not to leave.
No, it goes well beyond that. Read the actual Federal Register regulations:
Response Currently, if an individual is not required to present a passport upon entry to the United States, that individual does not need to present a passport upon exit. Under this final rule, however, if an individual must present a passport upon entry, then that individual will also need to bear one upon exit. In the event that non-U.S. citizens' passports are lost or stolen, those individuals would need to contact their nearest consular office to have the documents replaced prior to departing the United States.
(Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 226 / Friday, November 24, 2006 / Rules and Regulations, pages 68412-68415)
That's the "air phase", currently in effect. The "land and sea phase", originally scheduled for 2008, seems to be in a more ambiguous status.
So tell us, oh wise one, what would you have us do? It's easy to snipe from the cheap seats, but offering constructive suggestions is the only thing worth a damn in this debate.
We know that there will be a general election at some stage within the next three years or so, at which point it is all but certain that Labour will lose power.
We know that the current political climate has stripped away most of the real power from Tony Blair's administration, and that it is unlikely that they will be able to pass much further heinous legislation.
We know that opposition parties are openly saying they will kill/repeal much of the nastiest stuff New Labour have legislated in recent years, and this is likely to be a major election issue.
We also know, as I explained in another post in this discussion, that Labour really don't care about any sort of peaceful protest at this point, because they have nothing to lose.
So what is the wisest course of action for the many of us who disagree with their current policies? Should we wait patiently, knowing that little further harm can be done as long as we maintain peaceful pressure on the government, and then use what's left of our democratic system to get rid of them decisively when our opportunity comes? Or should we do something else, and if so, what?
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Some Muslims are actually engaged in evil acts. All Muslims are paying the price, however.
Some Muslims are actually engaged in evil acts. A plurality of the remainder, openly encourage the first group and even support them overtly or covertly to some degree. That's why all of them will be paying the price unless they start policing themselves to an acceptable standard of the international community or the international community will continue to escalate their own policing... Then in the end, everybody will lose.
Remember children, if we don't violate privacy so violently that she's rocking back and forth in foetal position in the corner begging for her mommy as we wait for our erections to recharge so we can violate her again, the terrorists have already won.
Heil.
It's been a long time.
The IRA knew after 9/11 that there could be no return to the terrorism of the past, as they and Sinn Fein realised that much of their support would erode away if there were any more Canary Wharf type of attacks. Fortunately the peace process was well under way so this alternative could be pursued.
I wasn't talking to you. I do not care for your responses. You know what you need to do. Rather than trailing me around and slinging mud at me you should be making amends for your repeated demonstrations of "wrong theory of mind". Your entire history here on Slashdot is a wrong theory of mind.
No, you may not suggest anything. Any suggestion you make is received as predatory. You are a backwoods hick who ran a part time overnight BBS from his dorm room in college. You see Slashdot as the reincarnation of your lost dream to be SysOp and lord and master of all the users around you.
G-F-Y.
the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
Exact quote? Don't try to wriggle out by claiming it was just a minor rewording; it's entirely different in meaning.
Please learn to comprehend basic English, get a sense of proportion, and most of all try not to overdramatise.
International Rugby referees have been told to clamp down on crooked scrum put-ins. So far, they still carry whistles not guns, and there aren't cattle trucks of number 9s heading for the camps.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
When 'they' come to take you and your family away in shackles your neighbors will just stand and watch for fear of being next.
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
They'll take you to an intern camp; work you until you outlive your usefulness and execute you in the most cost effective away.
Guillotine and incineration.
If they come to take you away you're already dead. If you won't defend anyone else at least defend yourself. Learn to use a gun and purchase one. If EVERY household had a gun the masses would have a bigger infantry than the government. They can slowly take away your freedoms before you care, but when they come for you, you'll care.
We should be grateful bureaucracy is so inefficient. Can you imagine how intrusive government could be with the wealth we give them, if only they spent it well?
Help stamp out iliturcy.
that they're doing this is that the country is suffering a short-fall on energy production. Enter their brilliant plan: take George Orwell's coffin, strap magnets to it, and then systematically destroy the individual's right to privacy. Viola! Instant energy!
We're geeks... We're the sorcerers of the modern-day world. --
The same way they offer diplomatic immunity?
Actually I think diplomatic immunity sounds worse. Presumably the government you represent has some reason to have faith in you, but once instated you're immune to just about anything. You can take a bomb in your suitcase, because it won't be searched. You can commit crimes in the country, and as long as they aren't too extreme, you won't be punished. Even if you have a history of ignoring local regulations (look at how many hundred parking tickets some diplomats have), they don't touch you.
A passport granted on not much more than a photo, a name, and a birthdate seems easy to get, but if you visit a foreign country and violate the laws you don't get a free ride.
It has quietened down a bit since the Americans stopped funding IRA terrorists:. stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1563119
Whichever way you look at it, it's true. I'm not.
Out of the frying pan, into the bog.
I just want to make sure I understand this.
As of this change, if I am a citizen in the UK and I want to leave, I must do one of the following:
1: Give the government insight into my personal and financial dealings; or
2: Sneak out.
So if I have items in my personal and financial dealings that I think will prevent me from obtaining a passport, I should probably run to get a passport before the deadline passes. So a smart government, I would say that my last-minute (ie after this was announced) appointment to get a passport ASAP should be considered probable cause for an investigation into my affairs.
On the other hand, if I were already a terrorist type, I'd probably get the f out now. Perhaps that's the point; if there's a deadline, maybe all of the terrorists will leave and only happy people will be left! And they'll never do anything bad, because if they did, they wouldn't be allowed to leave.
Yep. Never ever anything bad. This is a terrific idea.
Only the citizens will have to put up with this. Those who have no connection or loyalty to the society that is the UK will be free to come and go as they please within the UK.
Terrorism? How long can an individual act take to execute? Probably a lot less than the years that it takes to get citizenship.
He seems to be calling him on context, whether correctly discerned or not.
Nope, just calling him on his blog saying things like "Wait, no, bad, sorry, I'm an American.", and "It is with some regret that I note the passing of one of our great Presidents, Gerald Ford."
I guess he's only ashamed of his nationality on websites where he thinks it's the cool thing to do.
It would really help if this rule had a name. Hasbrouck, the writer who spotted the rule proposal up for public comment, says the references have been removed from the government websites. Doesn't mean it's dead. It'll surface again soon, when no one is paying attention. Some Friday night during basketball playoffs in June, probably . This stuff makes you dead cynical.
http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/001156.html
THE thing to read, but it's fairly dense:
http://hasbrouck.org/IDP/IDP-APIS-comments.pdf
http://www.papersplease.org/wp/
http://www.airfax.com/airfax/ifexpress/ifexpress11 132006.htm
Well to my ears that still sounds like the old propaganda about the "socialist" European countries where taxes are high and the unemployment even higher. Did you happen to read the article I linked to?
I know quite a few Americans here in Norway that I discuss politics with on a regular basis - and one thing that strikes me is that the tax burden is never seen as the real issue. In fact they say the taxes back in the US - all in all - are quite steep. I wonder how much you pay when you consider local/county/city, federal and school district taxes? Like the article says in Denmark the average is 50%. And then you get money back from the state for things like obligatory childrens welfare support (cash in hand to parents) and other social support services. If you make less money, you obviously pay a lot less than 50% of your income. I suppose something like 35% is quite common. And please remember we have free schools, Universities, healthcare, welfare, pensions and unemployment benefits. You get what you pay for.
There is no tax on TV - it is a license you pay for TV ownership. Just like the American Fuel Tax you pay that funds road maintenance. Call it a tax if you like, remember to give next time PBS calls.
The social programmes everywhere is also quite old fashioned and not at all true. In fact because of the European Union and it's goals of free flow of people/goods/services and money we have to be competitive even within our own economies. And that has lead to widespread privatisation in all levels of government. Today even the local garbage collection, county maintenance and street renovation is a gov contract like any other. So you see the reality is very different from what it once (maybe) was.
Working for the government is NOT seen as prestigious in Scandinavia. Perhaps in France. And they don't pay as you good either. In fact working for the local district (kommune) is a downright derogatory remark here. It implies you are lazy and have no incentive to work harder for better pay.
What I find really funny is that Americans like to talk a lot about "small government" - but practice is another entirely different matter! Since the "New Deal" era you have had socialist work and welfare programmes like most "socialist" countries. You just don't like calling them that.
Here in Norway the Constitution does call for a limited government. However by interpretation more tasks have become the responsibility of the government. The real difference is that we have more faith in our government and it's abilities than the average American. It would take a book to explain our mentality.
So you agree that Europe is not "necessarily socialist"? That is my message too. We are not the socialist countries the US thinks we are. And the real socialist countries have long since disappeared from Earth. Look at China. It is a boolean situation - we either are or not. Our way is called the Middle Way - it's Social-Democracy. Some times we are ruled by right, centre or left leaning governments. Yet the core concept of a democratic market economy and welfare state remains. That is what I would like Americans to understand.
On the other hand, if I were already a terrorist type, I'd probably get the f out now.
Err... no. You wouldn't, because your handlers would already have provided you with a nice solid background (legend, valid ID, banking records, birth cert, the works). You'd whistle your way through the system.
Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
It's an interesting take by a supposedly classless Labour party, but it appears the going assumption is that if you're not spending money to some degree you obviously have no need for travel (not to mention the fact that public transport is now both so expensive and unreliable that you're unlikely to have any success using that to leave the UK).
Leaves two niggly questions:
- isn't there such a thing as freedom of movement in the Human Rights Act?
- won't this solve the illegal immigrants problem? Who would want to come into a country now it's slowly turning into a warner version of Russia?
> So are the people upset about this, that the state can just pro-long the sentence of a human for
> as long as they can find a shrink to call him mentally ill?
Ter Beschikking Stelling (TBS) is, in my opinion, a good thing. It's not as gruesome as the death penalty, it's geared towards rehabilitation, and it keeps the incorrigables off the streets most of the time.
My dad, after being discharged from the Marine Corps (Korps Mariniers) on account of injury, worked as a prison guard in a TBS-institution. He wasn't exactly charmed with most of the inmates, and judging from his stories, it is not unwise to keep most of them off the street until further notice. This has little to do with the middle class. It has to do with the danger level represented by this fringe of society.
> Sweden is a country were, so far, the population clearly believes a strong social security
> system is to the benefit of all AND therefore continue to support it.
Funnily enough I lived there for six years. What I saw there was nothing short of amazing. The leftist people tend to go for jobs in teaching and the omnipresent kindergardens or "Dagis", where small children get left from age one-and-a-half because both parents need to work to make the budget go round.
While there, they teach children from day one how sharing, politeness, correctness and the collective are more important than the individual. In this manner, the "middle class", or rather 80% of population is instructed. When the time comes for voting, around 50% will vote for the socialist block because they've never tried to think of any alternative.
It is also because "Jantelagen", the principle that states noone's better than anyone, is an integral part of Swedish culture. The netto effect is that the population, to a large degree, believes what it's told to believe.
I'm not saying it's wrong, the Swedish system. I'm not saying that most people believe what they're told to believe in some way or another. I'm just saying that "support" for the strong social system in Sweden is more rooted in a long-standing tradition than actual belief. This goes for many systems. I clearly see it in Israel, where I currently live.
It's all "Monkey see, Monkey do". Humans may have evolved, but not beyond the following:
Take several monkeys and put them in a cage. Hang a banana on top of the cage, not within immediate reach, but still possible to get. Now get ready and wait. Very soon, one smart monkey will start climbing the cage to get the banana. Before the monkey gets to the banana, hose every single one of them with really cold water.
After a little while, another monkey is bound to make the same attempt. Once again, before the monkey reaches the banana, hose down all of them with cold water. It won't take long until all the monkeys in the cage develop a conditioned response, and if any one of them still has any bright ideas about getting a banana, the rest will quickly put an end to it by beating the crap out of him before they all get hosed with water.
Once all the monkeys learned not to get close to the banana, you can put the hose away and never use it again. Now, take one of these "veteran", so called "educated and experienced" monkeys out of the cage and replace him with a "newbie" monkey. The newbie will quickly try to get the banana, but before he gets to it, he will receive a warm welcome beating from his new buddies.
Take out another "veteran" monkey and put in a second "newbie" monkey. As the newest one tries to get the banana, the rest of the veterans will beat the hell out of him, and the previously added "newbie" monkey, still shocked an unclear why he got beat up himself, will not hesitate to join in the stomping of the newest guy anyways. Monkey see, monkey do.
Continue taking out the "experienced educated veteran" monkeys and replacing them with "newbie" monkeys one by one until there are no more original "veteran" monkeys left.Now observe what we have: any new monkey trying to get the banana gets pummeled by the rest. But why? There are no monkeys left that were hosed with water before, "Cause that's the way things have always been done here".
The first thing I thought of when I saw this was the tower of Cirith Ungol in Lord of the Rings.
That's pathetic.
i live in the UK but ive never had a british passport, gotta love dual citizenship.
Well, Bart, your uncle Arthur used to have a saying: "Shoot 'em all and let God sort 'em out."
Oh. So, you were commenting out of context.
I wonder if the government of that time thought themselves more in control or more able to control/manage what was going on at the time. But, in not being British, I can't tell what they were really thinking.
But, one thing is for certain: the technology wasn't there to do the scope of tracking they are now implementing.
Kjære nabo, have a look at the ruling parties in Norway. The current government is a coalition of Labour, Socialist-Left and the Center Party. SF's søsterparti. Perhaps you should consider moving? hehe
It's either Sometimes a people can deserve to be clamped down on or the Islamists in the OP.
The ladder is even worst then because it's a generalization. Maybe he meant "the Islamic radicals" or "Radical Islamists" but without a key word, the post is rather dramatic and scary. Im just glad the US doesn't have these kind of additute problems.
Ben
Marxist Hacker 42, until you decide to spread as many apologies as you have spread mud, then I cannot help you. You have created your own work: apologize you worthless piece of camel excrement.
the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
That's not a fair comparison. The Jews weren't firebombing embassies, let alone hijacking anything. Hatred against them was based on centuries-old religious and other cultural divisions, the need for a scapegoat for unrelated national problems, and a dose of bad science. Although anti-Muslim prejudice does have deep roots, and while you can argue we're unfairly characterizing a whole group based on the actions of a few, I can't think of any 1930s Jewish equivalent to the headline-making activities of Muslim fanatics. In fact, modern Muslims in Germany are making headlines for charming activities such as murdering family members for being insufficiently devout. If we mistreat Muslims it will be because we're overreacting to actual provocation by some part of that group.
Revive the Constitution.
+2 hard hitting, +2 smackdown, +2 pwnage...
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
A point that isn't usually articulated: the reason that this "What do you have to hide?" argument doesn't hold water is that universal monitoring has two likely outcomes. One is that once we start watching everyone all the time, we realized that everybody is a criminal under the current profusion of laws, and we start scaling them back to focus on things that actually should be illegal. The other is that we abandon the idea of the "rule of law," by selectively enforcing our laws. Watch for this effect: Smiling officials say "Don't worry, we'll ignore minor infractions," rather than de-criminalizing those crimes. It sounds convenient, but it means the government will have dirt on everyone, ready to use whenever it's convenient.
Revive the Constitution.
In Soviet Russia...ahem, Soviet Britain...
Finally! Never thought I'd find the thing, and it was on Slashdot all the time.
l
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/06/11/04/1353204.shtm
Big fat so fucking what? They cry for human rights and then claim that they're allowed to deny the same rights to anyone born without a dick because some heat-addled desert bandit who probably didn't exist said so. By any objectibve critera, they deserve to be clamped down on. By "clamped down on" I mean what the whole universe (apart from fifth columnists like you) understands the phrase to mean, i.e. to be told in no uncertain terms what's acceptable and what isn't, if you don't behave you'll be punished, and that if you don't like it then shut the door behind you.
If you want to live by medieval superstition, pack your bags and get on a flight to Iran. But don't even think about trying to bring it to me or my family, unless you're prepered to kill in the name of the religion of peace - not that you'd be the first - or are willing to die trying. Got that?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."