esme   10 #13 Posted January 23, 2015 Has the OP got something to hide? Do you have curtains ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Guest   #14 Posted January 23, 2015 you can have my bank details, you can do nothing with them except pay into my account without a password which is never written down or recorded. passwords when entered are encrpyted anyway.  That's what Jeremy Clarkson thought when he gave them out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Bill Plant   10 #15 Posted January 23, 2015 Do you have curtains ?  Nice come back. That question that shoud be asked to everyone who says if youve nothing to hide youve nothing to fear. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
eyemere   10 #16 Posted January 23, 2015 Why would I want to stop it? If it makes it a quicker and easier process to catch terrorists before they get chance to cause havoc and hurt innocent people, then surely that's a good thing. After all, it's not as if private information about yourself or anyone could not be found without these amendments in place if counter terrorism and security officials really wanted too, it just speeds up the process, possibly saving many lives in the process. They can snoop all they like on me, I'm a good girl.  The apologists will be against this, they don't seem to want terrorists arrested in case someone shouts at them when being questioned. no one should ever have to be shouted at  ---------- Post added 23-01-2015 at 13:02 ----------  Do you have curtains ?  I don't have beef. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
altus   540 #17 Posted January 23, 2015 The apologists will be against this, they don't seem to want terrorists arrested in case someone shouts at them when being questioned. no one should ever have to be shouted at  Nobody's saying that so leave off with the pathetic straw man arguments.  Nobody's saying the security services shouldn't have access to information if they need it. This is about safeguards to prevent them misusing that access - something they have been shown to do time and again. If it's that important for them to monitor someone is it that difficult for them to get a warrant to do so first? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
eyemere   10 #18 Posted January 23, 2015 Nobody's saying that so leave off with the pathetic straw man arguments. Nobody's saying the security services shouldn't have access to information if they need it. This is about safeguards to prevent them misusing that access - something they have been shown to do time and again. If it's that important for them to monitor someone is it that difficult for them to get a warrant to do so first?  I beg to differ, I think many will say that.  There is no need to go all crazy about this, do you really think for one minute that the country has got the money to pay people to look into Joe Bloggs's personal information when there is no reason to? No.  Clam down dear.  Let the government get on with doing what they are good at (running the country and keeping us all safe) and you concentrate on what you are good at Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
tzijlstra   11 #19 Posted January 23, 2015 Long live democracy... pitiful this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
ricgem2002 Â Â 11 #20 Posted January 23, 2015 Long live democracy... pitiful this. I wonder if the eu can help us out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
altus   540 #21 Posted January 23, 2015 I beg to differ, I think many will say that. Who's this many you're thinking of? There is no need to go all crazy about this, do you really think for one minute that the country has got the money to pay people to look into Joe Bloggs's personal information when there is no reason to? No.  There you go with the straw man arguments again. They are not going to target some random person but they do waste money targeting people they don't have a reasonable cause to. This is about oversight and accountability. Why do they security services not want to be accountable.  Clam down dear.  Let the government get on with doing what they are good at (running the country and keeping us all safe) and you concentrate on what you are good at  Don't try to be patronising - it just makes you look like you don't have good arguments. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
eyemere   10 #22 Posted January 23, 2015 Who's this many you're thinking of?   There you go with the straw man arguments again. They are not going to target some random person but they do waste money targeting people they don't have a reasonable cause to. This is about oversight and accountability. Why do they security services not want to be accountable.    Don't try to be patronising - it just makes you look like you don't have good arguments.  I do apologise if I came across as patronising, I just assumed that you would be good at, something. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
altus   540 #23 Posted January 23, 2015 I do apologise if I came across as patronising, I just assumed that you would be good at, something.  I'm good at lots of things - including pointing out people who don't have substantive arguments to make.  If you have any answers to the questions I asked in my posts I'd be happy to hear them. If you're just going to put up another straw man, don't bother. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
tzijlstra   11 #24 Posted January 23, 2015 I wonder if the eu can help us out  Funny you should mention that, it might well do, unfortunately I am not sure that Goettinger (I am sure you have heard of him ) doesn't agree with Cameron on this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
