CCTV (read: Government) invades your privacy
Last night’s programme was nothing more than propaganda from our own government. This is the second such incident (programme) in as many months where the BBC have amazingly produced something that seemingly supports the wonderous benefits of these privacy invading “security tools” merely weeks after the government has been trying to tell us just how great these things are and how they’re saving lives etc etc.
I’m flabbergasted at the frequency of these programmes too, they’re always in such close proximity to government sponsored initiatives and seem to be an attempt to brain wash us in to acceptance by telling us how beneficial they are. The first such programme I think was something to do with GPS tracking of vehicles so that we can be taxed on the mileage we do. The No.10 website had to close an online petition because of the number of people that responded to it about this particular “idea”. Tony sent out an email after he had his cronies close the petition simply saying “we’re not in any position to do this yet.”
I’m sorry Tony… what do you mean “yet”? Your people, the people, the british public has just TOLD you via this petition that they don’t want this to happen at all. Saying we’re not in any position to do this yet clearly avoids the desired response of “We are not going to do this.”
The problem here is that he knows he won’t be in power when the idea comes back to light again so why should he bother to say anything concrete about it?
Since I have my own soapbox here I feel that I must point out a couple of things. Yes it does sound a little conspiracy theory ish so I apologise in advance.
The government says to the people that we MUST pay a TV licence fee which only the BBC benefits from so, in essence, the BBC is government owned, perhaps not controlled but owned is certainly enough. Strategically placed managers certainly can have the desired effect, I know, I work at one such company.
The government insist that cameras are good for us and the security of the British public. Spouting their usual “If you’ve got nothing to hide then why are you bothered.” I’m bothered because the more of these things you put up, the less privacy I have. Would the government be just as happy for the public to have cameras in each MPs office? If not then why not when you’ve got nothing to hide? Why should I sacrifice the vast majority of my privacy for only a perceived increase in security?
“The statement that only those with something to hide will have something to fear, is nothing more than a thoughtless and foolish mantra repeated by those who prefer platitudes to the demands of careful and rational thinking.”
Put cameras up in one place and the criminals merely move somewhere else. It doesn’t stop the criminals it merely spreads them and their criminal activity around. The government knows this, it just gives them an excuse to put up more cameras in the areas where the criminals have moved to. More cameras = more control.
The current Labour government is corrupt and is controlling the media and the BBC with lies and is now attempting to control and track the population too by brainwashing us in to accepting invasion of our privacy. Let us not forget the other ideas they’ve come up with such as GPS tracking of vehicles and the national identity scheme that is being forced on the British public whether we like it or not. Perhaps it will be optional to carry the ID card in the first few years but how long will it be until it becomes compulsory “for our own safety”?
Our fathers and grandfathers fought for our freedom from fascist governments. Freedom to make our own decisions, freedom to do as we wished within the law. This freedom for which our fathers and grandfathers layed down their lives is being systematically eroded in the name of national security. Churchill would be turning in his grave if he knew what was happening in government today. I’m sick of living in a nanny/police state and the sooner we get rid of this government, the better.
[A]s David Brin points out in The Transparent Society, privacy advocates are typically hypocritical in that they want privacy for themselves and transparency for everyone else. Luckily, transparency doesnâ€™t work that way. If surveillance, then sousveillance. If you can watch me, then I demand the right to watch you. The consequence of privacy is that only the powerful will be able to watch others. In other words, the powerful will have privacy and the powerless wonâ€™t. Think about it. When is the last time you were able to see a companyâ€™s credit rating before you engaged with them? They do it to you all the timeâ€¦ Privacy is an experience that people have which is not only illusory, but serves the interests of those powerful players who can, and do, violate privacy all the time.