Skip to main content

Snooping proposal - hopefully on its way out

I was one of a number of Lib Dem MPs to publicly oppose the government's suggestions on online snooping. I have linked to a letter in The Independent of which I was one of the signatories.

There is another letter in The Guardian. I don't know why my name doesn't appear in the letter in The Guardian, but to me it is important to record that I have publicly opposed such an extension of state surveillance.

I personally don't mind CCTV in shopping centres. However, the government's proposals were clearly completely wrong.

Comments

Jake Maverick said…
your name is there now!

RIPA still there though. still ingerprinting school kids. still dropping bombs on children
still murdering people with immunity
still breaking into poples houses and selling it to companies for entertainment
still cameras recording audio every as well
you still have my dna, fingerprints and probably a chip in me....you still have't accused me of anything!

i have no problem with that in shopping centress, ithout the audio and at a resolution wher lip reaing software is of no use...
people recording my comings and goigsfrom my own home or when i viit my gran is a REAL problem, as wella s cameras in the house....

and this too still obviously going to happen with clegg in full support...
Jake Maverick said…
umm..more emails greyed out before i clicked on them again....long live the ffiffth column is what i say!

anyway, another truthsayer......what ar you doing to him?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29938
Jake Maverick said…
anonymous knobheads at Sky also exempt from proscution now? is it really only the unemployed that thes secret laws apply to now.....?

but regardless, surely all the conictions are safe now????

FREE THE CANOE MAN!

AND THE MOTHER WHO DID THE DECENT THING AND PUT HER SON OUT OF HIS MISERY WHEN THE PIGYOBS TRIED TO MURDER HIM AND NHS STAFF KEPT ON TORTURING HIM......
Jake Maverick said…
anybody ever heard of a DavidBromley/ Bromhall, not his 'slave name'? apparently works for MI5....but people who work for mafia5 aren't supposed to admit they work for mafia5....same with the poolice, and all g-men now as far as i can gather....

trying to trick me into agreeing to be abducted from the country, even though i am banned from leaving the country...all very odd and soemthing definately up!
Jake Maverick said…
thought u might have blocked that one first time around because of the name....

dare you to link to this one though, not even 'legalised' but you're still doin it?

http://wikileaks.org/the-spyfiles.html

and all those school kiddies, considering that European court ruling couple of years back now.....what have you fitted EVERY SINGLE CHILD up for in order to make that crime legal?
Jake Maverick said…
secret courts...way past time to remove Clegg? clash the coalition?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/apr/08/special-report-britain-rendition-libya

shame on you clarke

http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/apr/04/clarke-defends-secret-courts-plans-clegg

& yet further evidenc into the blatantly obvious....you're only allowed to base your decisions on whaat we tell you....same with the poxy morons in the civil service povifing 'information' for ministers to make their decisions on....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/jan/23/juror-contempt-court-online-research

disgusting ccountry we're surviving in
Jake Maverick said…
don't click it you're epileptic

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/cia-wins-fight-to-keep-mps-in-dark-on-rendition-7631357.html
Jake Maverick said…
http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/Police-set-join-London-protest/story-15770536-detail/story.html

& that one made me laugh! pigyobs gonna kick the shit out of themselves now and then prosecute themselves/ lie to themselves for alleging to have threatened to defend themselves? or is it time for some student payback.....?

you wanna solve the defict problem all u need to do is to wire up those cameras to the Internet and make it pay per view!

Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England. The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity. The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back. This is an issue that needs further work. In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.

Problems with Outlook Express - emails lost dbx corruption

In the light of the enthusiasm shown for my post relating to the OCX control that must not be named (and probably Microsoft's most embarrassing error of recent years) I thought I would write someting about Outlook Express. Outlook Express is the email client that comes as part of windows. I use it myself, although I have my emails filtered through a spam filter of my own devising written in java. It takes email off a number of servers using POP3 (Post Office Protocol TCP Port 110) and sends it using SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol port 25). I have recently spent a few hours dealing with the problem that arises when .dbx files get corrupted during compacting. Outlook Express (OE) stores the emails (and other things) in files with the suffix .dbx. Each folder has its own .dbx file. They are stored in hidden directories. This makes it harder to deal with things when OE goes wrong. It is very important to back up your stored *.dbx files as otherwise if you have a disk cra

Statement re False Allegations Campaign

Many people will know that my family and I have been subject to a campaign of false allegations by Esther Baker for the past 4 1/2 years. Yesterday there was a court judgment Baker v Hemming [2019] EWHC 2950 (QB) which formally confirmed that the allegations were false. Esther Baker, who had brought a libel claim against me, dropped her defence of Truth to my counter-claim and was taken by the judge as no longer trying to prove her allegations. Due to Baker's various breaches of court rules and orders, she has been barred from further repeating her allegations even in the court proceedings. Further claim of mine in libel against Baker are ongoing. There is a good summary in the Daily Mail here . This demonstrates the challenge in fighting false allegations in today's Britain. A substantial campaign was built up to promote allegations which had no substance to them. Various Labour MPs and in