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."
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.
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 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 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.
.. and Walmart in the US have one of the largest data mined databases in the world, whereas in the UK we have the data protection act that makes it a criminal offence to sell on your customer data without permission.
You can always pick examples but there really isn't that much difference... the only time I've really felt scared of the authorities was when I visited the US.
In fact please have a look here for how many European nations are run today.
If you don't like Walmart's policies, you can simply not shop there. If you don't like the govornments policies, you still have to deal with them.
What you just presented was not only an example of "well, the US does it too!" but of comparing apples to oranges.
Even though it's a completly worthless counter argument it takes a shot at both the US and Wal*Mart so it get's modded up in the seconds between when the page loaded and when I clicked to see what your reply was.
If your theory is different from practice, then your theory is wrong.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
To get as much bad data into their database as we can.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
That statement is not compatible with the ideals that make America something to be proud of.
P.S. Your anecdotal experience is not the basis for an argument that makes broad generalizations.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
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.
Never had a problem in pretty much anywhere I've been, around the world. Maybe it's just attitude? Maybe it's not freaking out if an officer wants to talk to me? Maybe... to answer your questions: yes, no, attitude gets you nowhere if you're biased against before you speak, see previous answer. and fyi: even overseas, whitey is protected vs. those of brown skin.
The IRS is the one organization that you don't want to fuck with. Remember, these are the guys who took down Al Capone.
are the new Jews. Give history a little time to repeat itself.
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
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.)
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.