One to your police forces and the other a Muslim. The first being obvious. NICE GRAB fellas. You put the kaibash on what could have been unimaginable. The other to the Muslim who NUTTED up and picked up the phone! We need more of you who are more interested in protecting innocent lives. :cheers:
Gelato pwns all
11th March 2006
Scotland Yard ftw!
And a big shout out to not being able to carry hand luggage onto planes anymore, and for having to taste any liquid (i.e. baby bottles) you bring onto planes, even if it's the mom's own breast milk. And a big shout out to airlines who said "they'll start serving free drinks" to compensate--maybe I'm old but didn't they once all serve free drinks? And a big shout out to conveniently milking a foiled terrorist plot to stay in office for another year, and to push even harder for national ID cards with no use.
Yes, it's nice that they got caught. Yes, you should remain skeptical, kids.
Politicians find a way to milk whatever it is they can by either hyping it or trashing it. Theyve done it long before we've been around, whats new about that? Ive never been on a plane that did not have a free drink, wether it be coke, water, coffee or whatever. Just have to pay for alcohol. IMO it sucks, but Id rather be thirsty than watching the Atlantic ocean come up at me rather quickly. Try not to ever connect in Philadelphia. The airport is pretty much obsolete since 911. Either way, inconveniant yes, but the alternative is rather frightening. You know I am a conspiracy theorist yes... but man! A simple stinger missile and we are free-falling. I can handle the strictist securities when flying. A plane is too vulnerable. Hence their interest.
Aw, c'mon Cyan, it's quality!
29th September 2004
United Kingdom 1 - Terrorists 0!
And a big shout out to conveniently milking a foiled terrorist plot to stay in office for another year
Huh? Politicians milking the terrrorist threat? What's next, Dubya getting through a "PATRIOT Act" that take Americans' rights away:confused:?
(...) and to push even harder for national ID cards with no use.
Why, exactly, are people so much against them?
And "no use"? What if you're hit by a car and the ambulance personell need to know your blood type and want to call your next-of-kin? "Oh, no can do, ID cards are a violation of my right of privacy!"
ID cards are extremely helpful to law enforcement forces and medical personell. This whole "they're against my rights"-paranoia is just incredibly childish. It's good to be "sceptical". It's not good to be paranoid.
Safe KeeperWhat's next, Dubya getting through a "PATRIOT Act" that take Americans' rights away
I think more like illegal phone taps. The US has some very very fundamental, horrible constitutional issues relating to individual civil liberties that will have to be addressed soon; PATRIOT is only one of them. The sooner people start questioning a bit more, the better. For example, did you know that a mandatory national ID bill was snuck as a rider amendment onto an emergency military appropriations bill, establishing 2008 as a target date for a US national ID card? Cool, huh?
Why, exactly, are people so much against them?
-Cost -Damages relationship between public and police (by introducing a crime for otherwise law-abiding citizens, i.e. forgetting your card"), plus, who wants "Papers, please"? People will be intimidated. -Makes identity theft much easier. If a document is all that's required to establish trust, the document is easily forged. A German guy recently figured out how to clone RFID passports, for example.) -Clear guidelines needed who has the authority to demand the ID--usually this is impossible to establish, viz. US social security numbers. They are nowadays used for _everything_, even though that's not their purpose. -Adequate privacy mechanisms, in most countries, are impossible to establish to safeguard the contents of the ID. Norway, Switzerland, etc. can do this. Larger, multicultural societies like the UK, France or the US, good luck. -They do not prevent terrorism: none of the 9/11 attackers had a prior record. -Safeguarding you: If/when your government ever does turn oppressive (it happens) it's a tool against you. -Misuse of details: the Independent revealed last year that Irish ministers were in talks about selling private details to firms for whatever use for ca. 750 pounds/each, in direct contradiction to what was promised in 2004 (i.e. no general access.) Furthermore, the Icelandic national medical DNA database was sold in 1998 to Hoffmann-LaRoche without privacy concerns. -Scope creep: what's its use? What will it be used for in 20 years? -Does not prevent crime: evidence connecting an individual to a crime, not the individual's identity, is the important factor in solving a crime.
Fundamentally, "I have nothing to hide" is not a valid argument. I do not want my government having the type of control over me that an ID card maintains. My government is my representative, it serves me, not the other way around. Aside from the myriad technical factors that make an ID scheme a potential catastrophe in terms of identity theft (I work in this field and have seen horror stories), it's nobody's goddamm business what's in my wallet.
Here's a fairly interesting compendium of opinions against the UK ID scheme:
More concise arguments against here:
(both of these are UK-specific, but make valid concerns about ID cards in general.)
As for your accident scenario, that's your choice, carry a driver's license, or a paper with your name on it, whatever. Don't make it for me.
I'm too cool to Post
28th September 2003
I get the feeling that this was a mere diversion for a bigger plan unfolding as we speak.
Watch this space. Oh and unless I'm much mistaken the current score is:
[SIZE="4"]UNITED KINGDOM 1-1 TERRORISTS[/SIZE]
Penalty shoot out anyone? Only in this game of Penalties the terrorists line up and we shoot the f*ck out them with automatic weapons :beer:
Al CaponePenalty shoot out anyone? Only in this game of Penalties the terrorists line up and we shoot the f*ck out them with automatic weapons
Try buying a gun in the UK. Good luck, lil' buddy!
And now I'm off to the pistol range.
FuzzyBunnyMy government is my representative, it serves me, not the other way around.
This is my vote for quote of the day. I too have no interest in giving my government anymore then I already do. Despite the fact that Im ok tightening certain other things like airport security. To me, its a much more real thing, security. NAT ID's are a joke. I already have one for my state. I wouldnt care if I have to go to the airport 5 hours early to get thoroughly checked out. BUT F THOSE ID CARDS!!! Honestly, I may be in the minority but I have a very real fear of flying. I do it, but its the most stressful time in my life. I am completely helpless while in a plane and dont mind the added security measures.
stylieHonestly, I may be in the minority but I have a very real fear of flying. I do it, but its the most stressful time in my life. I am completely helpless while in a plane and dont mind the added security measures.
John Gilmore (very well-known privacy advocate, co-founder of the EFF and Sun Microsystems multi-gajillionaire) sued the US government over the requirement to show IDs when boarding domestic flights. Interesting reading, especially his reasoning why showing IDs makes no sense at all:
Basically, the point is that, no matter where you stand on the ID issue or any other privacy-related topic, you should _always_ question the motives of your government. It is your right and duty as a citizen of a participatory, liberal democracy. It's your money (or your parents' money) that's paying these peoples' salaries, they are your employees.