6 replies to this topic

[skylark]

U.K. TO PUT CCTV CAMERAS IN PRIVATE HOMES

-WHAT'S COMING NEXT HUH?-

Britain to put 20,000 CCTV cameras inside private homes!!

*'Sweeps' NOTE:
…Yep the 'BIG BROTHER' thing again in Britain. This is Big brother. Reminds me of movies I've seen in the past. Unbelievable but true…And THEY always have an excuse as to why 'It's good for you and your safety'. Then…the 'Programme will be expanded of course', to include more & more of the general population/'S'

*Well…CLICK below on the 'My Website' Link for the story/comments:

Visit My Website

[skylark]

skylark, on Aug 4 2009, 10:35 AM, said:

U.K. TO PUT CCTV CAMERAS IN PRIVATE HOMES

-WHAT'S COMING NEXT HUH?-

Britain to put 20,000 CCTV cameras inside private homes!!

*'Sweeps' NOTE:
…Yep the 'BIG BROTHER' thing again in Britain. This is Big brother. Reminds me of movies I've seen in the past. Unbelievable but true…And THEY always have an excuse as to why 'It's good for you and your safety'. Then…the 'Programme will be expanded of course', to include more & more of the general population/'S'

*Well…CLICK below on the 'My Website' Link for the story/comments:

Visit My Website

...Looks like I'm the only one commenting here. What does that say?/'S'

*'Sweeps' NOTE:
…Just let's say, 'Read it' and weep all you British 'Sheeple'. Now do something!

Oh yeah, fully aware 'The States' will pick up on this too…or did they give it to the British? Hey, did anyone know that Hillary Clinton's favorite book is George Orwell's l984??? I am thinking it must be her "Bible".
I can't even bring myself to comment on THIS article. Things are going so berserk. What can be said? After all…it should be no surprise to anyone/'S'

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, August 3, 2009

UK Government To Install Surveillance Cameras In Private Homes
State to spy on parents, make sure kids go to bed on time, attend school

The UK government is about to spend $700 million dollars installing
surveillance cameras inside the private homes of citizens to ensure that
children go to bed on time, attend school and eat proper meals.
No you aren't reading a passage from George Orwell's 1984 or Aldous Huxley's
Brave New World, this is Britain in 2009, a country which already has more
surveillance cameras watching its population than the whole of Europe put
together.

Now the government is embarking on a scheme called "Family Intervention
Projects" which will literally create a nanny state on steroids, with social
services goons and private security guards given the authority to make
regular "home checks" to ensure parents are raising their children correctly

Telescreens will also be installed so government spies can keep an eye on
whether parents are mistreating kids and whether the kids are fulfilling
their obligations under a pre-signed contract.
Around 2,000 families have been targeted by this program so far and the
government wants to snare 20,000 more within the next two years. The tab
will be picked up by the taxpayer, with the "interventions" being funded
through local council authorities.

Another key aspect of the program will see parents deemed "responsible" by
the government handed the power to denounce and report bad parents who allow
their children to engage in bad behavior. Such families will then be
targeted for "interventions".

Both parents and children will also be forced to sign a "behavior contract"
with the government known as Home School Agreements before the start of
every year, in which the state will dictate obligations that it expects to
be met.

The opposition Conservative Party, who are clear favorites to win the next
British election, commented that the program does not go far enough and is
'too little, too late'.

Respondents to a Daily Express article about the new program expressed their
shock at the totalitarian implications of what is unfolding in the United
Kingdom under the guise of social services initiatives.
'Sorry, but what the hell? Why are people not up in arms about this?'
writes one, 'This is a complete invasion of privacy, and it totally ignores
the fact that the state does NOT own kids. It's not up to them how parents
choose to raise their children, as long as the parents do not actively harm
them. Why on earth aren't the public rioting? It's completely anathema to
basic British freedoms'.

'Excuse me!?! What an incredible intrusion into the privacy of a family!
George Orwell must be spinning in his grave right now', writes another.
'I have one comment to make: it completely violates Article 8 of the
European Convention on Human Rights (Human Rights Act 1998). Has this
minister and his lackies even done any basic homework on basic human rights
and civil liberties? Or rather they've just decided to completely ignore
them'…adds another.

The move to install surveillance cameras inside private homes is also on the
agenda across the pond. In February 2006, Houston Chief of Police Harold
Hurtt said cameras should be placed inside apartments and homes in order to
'fight crime" due to there being a shortage of police officers'.
'I know a lot of people are concerned about Big Brother, but my response to
that is, if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about
it?' Chief Hurtt told reporters.

Andy Teas with the Houston Apartment Association supported the proposal,
saying privacy concerns would take a back seat to many people who would,
'appreciate the thought of extra eyes looking out for them'.

If such programs come to fruition and are implemented on a mass scale then
the full scope of George Orwell's depiction of a totalitarian society is his
classic novel 1984 will have been realized.

The following passage is from Orwell's 1984;
The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound that
Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by
it, moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the
metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard.

There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at
any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged
in on any individual wire was guesswork.

It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate
they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live — did live,
from habit that became instinct — in the assumption that every sound you made
was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.

[Seth Haniel]

and i've had my hair cut specially

Smile please

hopefully there will be too many and their signals will interrupt each others

we are followed every step as it is - and traced to the metre by your mobile phone.


And now they scan your passport instead of just glance at it.

[captain]

Seth Haniel, on Aug 7 2009, 08:10 AM, said:

and i've had my hair cut specially

Smile please

hopefully there will be too many and their signals will interrupt each others

we are followed every step as it is - and traced to the metre by your mobile phone.


And now they scan your passport instead of just glance at it.

-'And you don't believe we're on the Eve of Destruction'-
-IF WE DON'T REVOLT AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT-?
Carry on-Captain

[skylark]

captain, on Aug 8 2009, 12:11 AM, said:

-'And you don't believe we're on the Eve of Destruction'-
-IF WE DON'T REVOLT AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT-?
Carry on-Captain

*Right you are Captain,
...But here's SOMETHING HOPEFUL. Maybe there is a 'REVOLT' coming, at least in some quarters/'S'


Hundreds Of ISPs in Britain...Refuse To Go Along With Big Brother Spy System
Communications firms warn of unprecedented extension of state powers

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Wednesday, August 5, 2009

A group of over 300 internet service providers and telecommunications firms
is fighting back against the British government’s plans to monitor all
emails, phone calls and internet activity nationwide.

[simple simon]

I think that a large part of their saying 'no' is related to the cost of doing this.

Meanwhile I saw somewhere that the EU is suing Sweden for NOT introducing similar regulations.

Simon

ps, I know of an excellent place where the govt. can stick its cameras (its a part of the human body). They would get a right eyeful of exactly the right commodity to match their proposals. Alas, modesty prevents my being too detailed to name the bodily oraface, however, when one thinks of the human alimentary canal then the 'other' end is known as a 'mouth'.

Edited by simple simon, 13 August 2009 - 08:29 PM.

[skylark]

simple simon, on Aug 13 2009, 09:26 PM, said:

I think that a large part of their saying 'no' is related to the cost of doing this.

Meanwhile I saw somewhere that the EU is suing Sweden for NOT introducing similar regulations.

Simon

ps, I know of an excellent place where the govt. can stick its cameras (its a part of the human body). They would get a right eyeful of exactly the right commodity to match their proposals. Alas, modesty prevents my being too detailed to name the bodily oraface, however, when one thinks of the human alimentary canal then the 'other' end is known as a 'mouth'.

*I'll drink to that Simon,
...We, in the Nursing profession, know of a special ENEMA for just this type of application/recipient, it's called 'The 3 H' enema. It translates to 'HIGH/HOT/AND A HELLAVA LOT'. Good on you/'S'