andygardener Posted June 24, 2013 Share Posted June 24, 2013 Great to see a forum quorum than secret services should not be secret, You fecking morons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted June 24, 2013 Share Posted June 24, 2013 ... Why not vote yourself? I can understand someone who votes but feels unhappy about the outcome but someome who doesnt vote fully deserves the government they end up with. Is "Because I'm not a US Citizen" a good enough answer? (I remember [as a child] learning about 'No taxation without representation'. It's not true! - I have to file a 1040 every year. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted June 24, 2013 Share Posted June 24, 2013 Is "Because I'm not a US Citizen" a good enough answer? (I remember [as a child] learning about 'No taxation without representation'. It's not true! - I have to file a 1040 every year. ) So did I when I had a green card. I was living here working and paying taxes You want representation? File for citizenship Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted June 25, 2013 Share Posted June 25, 2013 No thanks - my wife can get the representation for me. Actually, I've found that most of the Congressmen I've encountered have been very willing to talk to me / help me irrespective of the fact that I'm not a citizen. I'm not sure whether that's because I didn't tell them (and they didn't ask) or because the ones I've met seem to be interested in doing their job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavegirl Posted June 25, 2013 Share Posted June 25, 2013 Great to see a forum quorum than secret services should not be secret, You fecking morons I think the point is that the public have been given certain expectations and understandings regarding how the secret services should operate. We've come to expect and most people accept that targetted surveillance is acceptable to a free democratic society but mass surveillance is in the realm of tyrannical dictatorships. If the government wanted to do it they ought to have sought the acceptance of society before they went ahead- there ought to have been discussion and debate regarding the pro's and can's and they ought to have followed the informed will of the people they're supposed to serve. They didn't, they created laws to give the impression that people in general weren't being spied upon and then found ways to secretly bypass those laws. At the same time they were pushing their 'transparency' agenda and harping on about how great our free democratic society is. People have been ignored, lied to and betrayed and have an absolute right to be furious about it. There is a huge risk with this type of surveillance that the government will look at the large amount of data collected and begin to criminalise us all in their minds- it's a natural human reaction when faced with large amounts of data- they don't see individuals with individual circumstances they only see large statistics and potential crimes. Having access to a person's private life changes your perspective about that person- (very few people are whiter than white and yet very few people are criminals) that's why people keep those bits private until they know somebody well. The government is not your best friend, they won't be understanding, they'll simply lump people together and decide they constitute another problem that must be solved. The kickback will be more controls, more laws and greater surveillance which will lead to more people being caught in the net. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted June 25, 2013 Share Posted June 25, 2013 Great to see a forum quorum than secret services should not be secret, You fecking morons The point is they are supposed to protect us from threat. Not become a threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted June 25, 2013 Share Posted June 25, 2013 Spies caught spying? This is news is it? What did you think NSA & GCHQ did? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted June 25, 2013 Share Posted June 25, 2013 I think the point is that the public have been given certain expectations and understandings regarding how the secret services should operate. We've come to expect and most people accept that targetted surveillance is acceptable to a free democratic society but mass surveillance is in the realm of tyrannical dictatorships. If the government wanted to do it they ought to have sought the acceptance of society before they went ahead- there ought to have been discussion and debate regarding the pro's and can's and they ought to have followed the informed will of the people they're supposed to serve. They didn't, they created laws to give the impression that people in general weren't being spied upon and then found ways to secretly bypass those laws. At the same time they were pushing their 'transparency' agenda and harping on about how great our free democratic society is. People have been ignored, lied to and betrayed and have an absolute right to be furious about it. There is a huge risk with this type of surveillance that the government will look at the large amount of data collected and begin to criminalise us all in their minds- it's a natural human reaction when faced with large amounts of data- they don't see individuals with individual circumstances they only see large statistics and potential crimes. Having access to a person's private life changes your perspective about that person- (very few people are whiter than white and yet very few people are criminals) that's why people keep those bits private until they know somebody well. The government is not your best friend, they won't be understanding, they'll simply lump people together and decide they constitute another problem that must be solved. The kickback will be more controls, more laws and greater surveillance which will lead to more people being caught in the net. Do you know how M.I.5 and M.I.6 operate? Has the government published a paper which can be picked up for a couple of quid at H Smith & Sons "General guidlines for the domestic and foreign operations of HM Intelligence Services"? :hihi: What's the point in having either of the above agencies if their operations are public knowledge? One negates the other ---------- Post added 25-06-2013 at 15:52 ---------- No thanks - my wife can get the representation for me.Actually, I've found that most of the Congressmen I've encountered have been very willing to talk to me / help me irrespective of the fact that I'm not a citizen. I'm not sure whether that's because I didn't tell them (and they didn't ask) or because the ones I've met seem to be interested in doing their job. So your wife votes like you tell her to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted June 25, 2013 Share Posted June 25, 2013 Some people seem to be arguing that the word 'secret' in the phrase 'secret service' somehow justifies the world's governments from doing whatever they want in the world of surveillance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted June 25, 2013 Share Posted June 25, 2013 Some people seem to be arguing that the word 'secret' in the phrase 'secret service' somehow justifies the world's governments from doing whatever they want in the world of surveillance. But what do you think the word 'secret' means, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.