Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
04 Nov 15
12:06
Joined:
Date Joined:
05 Apr 06
...
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 17
|
By:
didnt watch, that place is a temple of obfuscation now.
they will be 'debating' the snoopers charter today, they will pass it even though no other European Union country has such laws and they wont be clear with the public about how algorithms will determine suspected deferred guilt for them to then ask for further snooping practices to be used. The lords may or may not shuffle uncomfortably in their seats but will ultimately agree the powers are required (even though death in the country by suicide as a result of governmental action far exceeds anything like those killed by 'terrorism') Britain will then be the stooge for spying, not just on its own subjects but also be the sock puppet for america who themselves wont allow such intrusions into civil liberties. A number of years will pass and the first abuses of the system will come to light as personal data is used and abused and the MPs will come out and say they were against it....just like they did about the Iraq wars. |
|
By:
For Parliamentarians we will go even further. This Bill will for the first time put into law the Prime Minister’s commitment that in any case where it is proposed to intercept the communications of a Parliamentarian – including members of this House, members of the House of Lords, UK MEPs and the members of the devolved legislatures – the Prime Minister would also be consulted.
May is getting MPs onside by saying they have privileges that common folk dont have, that they infact have a triple lock to be almost above suspicion. The Home secretary, a Judge and The Prime Minister have to authorise MPs communication and activities to be scrutinised...... |
|
By:
was reading this earlier, an article in New Scientist pondering the UK government’s scientific illiteracy.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28445-uk-surveillance-bill-makes-a-scientific-ass-out-of-the-law/?utm_source=NSNS&utm_medium=SOC&utm_campaign=hoot&cmpid=SOC%257CNSNS%257C2015-GLOBAL-hoot |
|
By:
it is illiterate. How can they keep all browsing meta data and not catch an mp using free wifi in starbucks.
I think the government thinks we are all mugs (maybe they have evidence in that the country voted for them) |
|
By:
yes indeed!
|
|
By:
I quite liked this from the above link....
The government also seems to think it can legislate chemistry. Its Psychoactive Substances Bill proposes to ban any substance that alters mental state. Taken at face value, that’s everything from chocolate to flowers. What I find disconcerting about the snoopers charter is that they are spinning a line to get the powers. They say that they wont look at the exact web pages that are accessed, but will take the website detail....as though that makes any difference whatsoever. They have software that works on probability, they will just add websites they think are visited by people who may be involved in crime who have statistically also viewed. I.E. if they suspect a crime is committed and they found a higher than average likelihood that people of said crime also have certain other interests then they will be flagged up. The government arnt clear how this will be assessed, or for that matter which laws they are looking to remedy. This could be using databases to address every slight deviation of every law in time, it could literally be big brother watches for every single violation. The GCHQ already admitted to having unauthorised personnel view data that shouldnt have been allowed, as well as admitted to taking 1.8million images of users of yahoo webcams in operation optic nerve. |
|
By:
May said
This will be one of the strongest authorisation regimes anywhere in the world. in reference to the safeguards. But she didnt say that the reason for this was because we are entering new ground no other country has even attempted. |
|
By:
bit of a struggle today PM,S questions corbyn struggled to answer some of daves questions,you,d think after after 5 years an eton educated chap what have got the idea by now, LOL,
 |
|
By:
David Davis doing an honourable job in holding the government to account again.....
From the guardian website I draw everybody’s attention to section 19(2), which tells the judicial commissioners they have to make decisions based on judicial review principles, not on the basis of the evidence. In other words the home secretary would have to behave in an extraordinary manner not to get his or her warrant approved. This is not the judge checking the evidence, it is the judge checking that the correct procedure has been followed. This is not quite the protection it was represented as. |
|
By:
precise work from the BBC subtitle writer today
.  |
|
By:
Well, she never smiles !
|
|
By:
Poor daves losing his memory out of 650 mp,s
69 pledged to give their payrise to charity unfortunately only 25 have, our 40 million pound PM is one of the 44 who,s memory seems to have gone,must be something in the subsidised wine cellar |
|
By:
administrative error (nap)
|
|
By:
Found HH's source :
. https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/3rhmj0/well_played_bbc_subtitles_person/ |
|
By:
Click on Well Played at top.
|
|
By:
The questions need to be vetted better, so many are a waste of time, especially the Tory ones which advertise something good they think they`ve done in somebodys constituency, and usually includes "long term economic plan" in it. Dave usually agrees with his right honourable friend, and theres another minute of everybodys life gone that cant be got back
|
|
By:
the whole things a joke. its called pm's questions yet the pm thinks it gives him a chance to ask questions of the leader of the opposition. soft ball questions from his own side then he ignores questions from the oppostion with his own prepared answers. vote jollyswagman, autrocacy with a self declared left/right fruitcake for your leader !!!
|