Sunday, May 25, 2008

Big Mother Database

Got a nice email from someone who liked my articles at newswithviews who asked me to include Alan Watt in my list of further reading/listening. So I went to Alan's site and remembered being there before and I'm sure I linked to him somewhere at the ACL. One of his recent shows was a discussion of this amazing revelation by the Imperial government.

Home Office plans to create 'Big brother' database for phones calls, emails and web use
By Andy Bloxham
Last Updated: 7:07AM BST 20/05/2008
The Home Office will create a database to store the details of every phone call made, every email sent and every web page visited by British citizens in the previous year under plans currently under discussion, it has emerged.

The Government wants to create the system to fight terrorism and crime. The police and security services believe it will make it easier to access important data as communications become more complex.

Telecoms firms and internet service providers (ISPs) have already been approached by the Home Office, which would be given customer records if the plans were realised.

The security services and police would then be able to access records for any individual over the previous 12 months by gaining permission through the courts.

More here:'Big-brother'-database-for-phones-calls,-emails-and-web-use.html

Here's my favorite line from the article: "The plans will raise concern from data protection and civil liberty campaigners and fuel objections to the perceived rise of a "Big Brother" state."

That's what every article about the emerging database always says. "Raise concern" is a polite way of saying the people who claim to be concerned will file the appropriate papers and make a lot of noise and then all the genuinely concerned folks think their legitimate concerns are being addressed by professional "campaigners." Here's an article that flat out says the British government is planning on using ALL private correspondence to catch criminals (and don't you know there's a lot more things defined as "crimes" these days, includng things like saying or writing the "wrong" things). But it's only a "perceived rise" of the Big Mother state, so... only paranoids or professional complainers perceive it to be thus?

Now add to this growing database all the other information the government collects in the COMPASS program and the Communitarian Community Census and you've got all the evidence the Sanhedrin Court needs to determine what kind of person you are. Remember NO actual crimes (in the usual sense of the word) have to be committed before Big Mother steps in to save the public from you. The communitarians also intervene and "save" people from themselves who have the "POTENTIAL for crime." I used to call Big Mother a high tech soothsayer. All they need to do now is throw in a little pinch of the global religion to give it that final godly, spiritual touch. Like Veronica Jackson, director of the Department of Neighborhoods NATS (a pilot test for COMPASS datagathering operations in Seattle, WA in 1999) said: "Sacrifices have to made for the good of the community." That phrase just rolled off her lying lips... but she couldn't answer one simple question about where that mindset originated.

What's the odds the author of the UK Telegraph article was trained by Common Purpose?

1 comment:

Darren Weeks said...

There is absolutely no question that September 11, 2001 was a shadow government operation. There is so much evidence that it is not worth debating, anymore. Anyone who doesn't believe that, either hasn't read the documentation, or doesn't want to face the truth.

With that being said, we really don't really have to get into the details about the temperature steels melts, and whether or not the planes had "pods" on them, etc.

My point is that it seems to me that the so-called 9/11 "truth" movement only came along after real patriots had been using concrete documentation to expose the false paradigm that led to the war. Whenever genuine patriotic Americans start becoming effective, the other side has to somehow figure out a way to get the issue back within their dialectic.

In this case, Michael Moore releases his film Fahrenheit 911, and the rest of Hollywood follows suit. Suddenly, 9/11 becomes a democrat issue. It becomes all of Bush's fault. If you can pin 9/11 on Bush, he becomes the straw man. The answer then becomes, vote Bush out; elect a democrat. They know the straw man will eventually be gone, and so will the relevance of 9/11 truth.

Meanwhile, on the flip side, those who research and expose the truth of what happened on September 11th, are discredited by the phony neo-CON talk show hosts (Limbaugh, Quinn, etc.). They say that if you tell the truth about 9/11, you must be one of those democratic liberals on the left who just want to make Bush look bad. Your message becomes tarnished because you probably have ulterior motives.

They take an issue that is absolutely free from the dialectic, and find a way to put it right at the center of their left-right paradigm.

I think this is why so few people ever are able to get out of the dialectic. It seems to me that the dialectic shifts, whenever necessary, to swallow up any independent thought.