Jump to content

The banker loving, baby-eating Tory party thread (regenerated)


blandy

Recommended Posts

 

 

Wanting to do stuff, and having a view or a principle are much less important than winning or looking like a winner - this is party politics.

Trying and failing to get a vote on this would make them look bad, so they're not going to try. I think they think it's the right thing to do, I think they think that's less important than 'winning'; and they might not win the vote, this might make them look bad, so the principle is out of the window - party politics in a nutshell.

I think that's also why there are people in the labour party who don't want Corbyn because being Labour is less important than winning - both parties have people that don't believe in anything but power.

Totally agree. And on top of that I think they want to do something at least in part because it'll make them "look good" and make the american gov't happy and make them look big.

They have no plan and no coherent idea of who in the awful mess is the good guys and bad guys (I suspect there aren't any good guys). They have no idea what success resulting from their actions would look like, in terms of results in Syria. As AWOL said ages ago, the only way all these groups of nutters and fanatics could be adversely affected would be with troops on the ground.  But there's no guarantee  "we" would win and every guarantee that there would be more death and destruction and bodies coming back to the UK and all the other horrors.

So troops on the ground is out of the question and that renders Air strikes completely pointless, or as near as. Furthermore they've neutered the RAF to a huge extent with their cost cutting at the 2010 (laughable) SDSR. SO much so that we could barely actually do anything anyway. It would be purely tokenism. There are no upsides to us being involved militarily in this way. Don't they ever learn?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have to say this keeping a history of peoples last year what they surf for me is absolutely ridiculous

It's invasive, expensive, and pointless.

Anybody with even the slightest concern about surveillance can  type a few words in to Google, and have a VPN connection through an overseas server in a matter of minutes.

It's going to cost the ISPs to store all of this extra data, that'll entirely be made up of stupid shit that the police have no interest in. 

On top of that, it'll lead to interesting questions about identifying internet users, if they try to use ISP logs as evidence. An IP address is not a person.

Edited by Davkaus
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought I read the other week they were going to remove the 12 months browsing history part from the bill  ...If the commons don't do the right thing and defeat this bill then we the people should be marching on the Houses of Parliament with pitchforks  , but no doubt the nothing to hide nothing to fear brigade will be along shortly ......

 

I'm sure the Govt will be using algorithms  to flag suspicious activity and wont be  reading my emails or checking my  browsing history but that really isn't the point 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate them especially IBS as I call him. I am officially classed as disabled & I am now £70 a month worse off which does not sound a lot but that is the difference between just about coping to now struggling. These b*st**ds are making me ill. Anxiety has now progressed to OCD & panic attacks . What makes me mad is that some of these scumbags are receiving up to £25 grand a year in accommodation costs yet begrudge disabled people like me £70 a month  because I live in a 2 bedroomed pensioners bungalow as there are no one bedroomed ones round here. I need to live next to people I trust as I have trouble going anywhere on my own & my neighbour runs me around in his car . Being disabled is not a lifestyle choice but these people treat us as if it is. Rant over.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

to flag suspicious activity and wont be  reading my emails or checking my  browsing history but that really isn't the point 

I think that's bad enough.

I don't have a huge objection to the equivalent of phone tapping, when it comes to internet usage. If there's a suspect being investigated for a crime, I think the police should have the ability to request the ISP start logging web traffic, for the duration of the investigation. 

Constantly logging all traffic, and allowing the police to go throw the archive is horrifying, IMO.  Imagine if they did the same for phone calls, and instead of tapping your phone if they suspect you of something with a court order, they tap everyone's phones, and got to listen in to every single call you'd had in the last year. It'd be absurd if it wasn't so scary.

Not to mention the analysis on a wider scale they can do. Their initial goal seems to be to be able to dig through a user's history to see if there's anything suspicious, it won't be long before that switches around, and they're running queries to extract a full list of users who have visited a certain site, without getting a court order against individuals.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't have a huge objection to the equivalent of phone tapping, when it comes to internet usage. If there's a suspect being investigated for a crime, I think the police should have the ability to request the ISP start logging web traffic, for the duration of the investigation. 

Constantly logging all traffic, and allowing the police to go through...

This.If there are reasons to suspect someone is up to something, then by all means get a warrant and then collect or monitor the extra info.

Given that it's surely relatively easy to hide nefarious internet activity by going to an internet Cafe, or using TOR or VPNs and all the rest - anyone with half a brain would be able to take steps to avoid this, while normal people have their data collated and possibly sold/hacked/lost or whatever else.

They should be starting the other way round - if there are places on the internet that are the equivalent of a drug-den, or stolen car garage or bomb factory or whatever, then monitor it, see who goes there and follow up on those visitors. Do that rather than essentially following everyone all of the time. It's going to massively counter productive for some groups of society - Muslim people, climate change campaigners, poverty protesters, people doing research into certain areas - say radicalisation, or people trafficking.

US lot chattering away on here are not interesting enough to have their attentions, but they simply should not be permitted to monitor us all, all the time. They work for us, we are not their subjects. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't have a huge objection to the equivalent of phone tapping, when it comes to internet usage. If there's a suspect being investigated for a crime, I think the police should have the ability to request the ISP start logging web traffic, for the duration of the investigation. 

Constantly logging all traffic, and allowing the police to go through...

This.If there are reasons to suspect someone is up to something, then by all means get a warrant and then collect or monitor the extra info.

Given that it's surely relatively easy to hide nefarious internet activity by going to an internet Cafe, or using TOR or VPNs and all the rest - anyone with half a brain would be able to take steps to avoid this, while normal people have their data collated and possibly sold/hacked/lost or whatever else.

They should be starting the other way round - if there are places on the internet that are the equivalent of a drug-den, or stolen car garage or bomb factory or whatever, then monitor it, see who goes there and follow up on those visitors. Do that rather than essentially following everyone all of the time. It's going to massively counter productive for some groups of society - Muslim people, climate change campaigners, poverty protesters, people doing research into certain areas - say radicalisation, or people trafficking.

US lot chattering away on here are not interesting enough to have their attentions, but they simply should not be permitted to monitor us all, all the time. They work for us, we are not their subjects. 

I'm starting to warm to the bill after all  ... :P

Edited by tonyh29
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Labour and the Lib Dems are supporting it.

 

words removed, all of them, they surrender our privacy without a trace of shame.

i was about to say if this went through im not voting tories ever again but if these clowns are all voting it all in. Im not voting anymore

Doea anyone actually think these politicians web history is likely to be monitored?  Yeah right

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see the future generation of McDonalds workers with humanities degrees  have been out on the streets again today .. if you want to smash things up people join the Bullingdon club  ..otherwise get a job and stay off the streets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't have a huge objection to the equivalent of phone tapping, when it comes to internet usage. If there's a suspect being investigated for a crime, I think the police should have the ability to request the ISP start logging web traffic, for the duration of the investigation. 

Constantly logging all traffic, and allowing the police to go through...

This.If there are reasons to suspect someone is up to something, then by all means get a warrant and then collect or monitor the extra info.

Given that it's surely relatively easy to hide nefarious internet activity by going to an internet Cafe, or using TOR or VPNs and all the rest - anyone with half a brain would be able to take steps to avoid this, while normal people have their data collated and possibly sold/hacked/lost or whatever else.

They should be starting the other way round - if there are places on the internet that are the equivalent of a drug-den, or stolen car garage or bomb factory or whatever, then monitor it, see who goes there and follow up on those visitors. Do that rather than essentially following everyone all of the time. It's going to massively counter productive for some groups of society - Muslim people, climate change campaigners, poverty protesters, people doing research into certain areas - say radicalisation, or people trafficking.

US lot chattering away on here are not interesting enough to have their attentions, but they simply should not be permitted to monitor us all, all the time. They work for us, we are not their subjects. 

I'm starting to warm ... :P

climate change,  y'see

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â