Re: National security v freedom? : Wed Apr 04, 2012 2:08 pm  

cod'ead wrote: Ten reasons to be proud of Cameron There are other items on that list which are not-even-thinly-disguised bull droppings, such as... The ending of restrictions on local councils should mean a flowering of local innovation in the years ahead as local people, free of central control, experiment with new ways of delivering services and then other councils emulate their approaches All of which is meaningless, unless it means that I, as a local person, can approach Leeds City Council and tell them I'd like to experiment with one of their refuse trucks for a month as I think I can empty the bins quicker than the council staff can. On the other hand Biffa tried that one with the council and they all went out on strike for three months.

cod'ead wrote: Ten reasons to be proud of Cameron There are other items on that list which are not-even-thinly-disguised bull droppings, such as... The ending of restrictions on local councils should mean a flowering of local innovation in the years ahead as local people, free of central control, experiment with new ways of delivering services and then other councils emulate their approaches All of which is meaningless, unless it means that I, as a local person, can approach Leeds City Council and tell them I'd like to experiment with one of their refuse trucks for a month as I think I can empty the bins quicker than the council staff can. On the other hand Biffa tried that one with the council and they all went out on strike for three months.

Re: National security v freedom? : Wed Apr 04, 2012 3:43 pm  

McLaren_Field wrote:

There are other items on that list which are not-even-thinly-disguised bull droppings, such as...

All of which is meaningless, unless it means that I, as a local person, can approach Leeds City Council and tell them I'd like to experiment with one of their refuse trucks for a month as I think I can empty the bins quicker than the council staff can.

On the other hand Biffa tried that one with the council and they all went out on strike for three months.

I could say, my company is withdrawing all customer support, this should allow innovation in problem solving that we can then claim credit for.

You have be a special kind of stupid to fall for this.

Re: National security v freedom? : Wed Apr 04, 2012 4:05 pm  

DHM wrote:

I could say, my company is withdrawing all customer support, this should allow innovation in problem solving that we can then claim credit for.

You have be a special kind of stupid to fall for this.

... and even many of the Tories posters comments after the article are not that dumb.

Re: National security v freedom? : Thu Apr 05, 2012 8:50 am  

Yet more lies from the lying liars that tell them Justice Secretary Ken Clarke defended the Government’s dangerous secret justice plans on the grounds that the changes were needed to reassure a “nervous” CIA which had “started cutting back” on intelligence-sharing with the UK. This despite never discussing the issue with US authorities And A former senior CIA officer said: “the Central Intelligence Agency would never hold any information back from the British that was important to their domestic security, or to the security of their people and facilities overseas.” So, more bollox then eh? Mind you, if you've got nothing to hide...

Yet more lies from the lying liars that tell them Justice Secretary Ken Clarke defended the Government’s dangerous secret justice plans on the grounds that the changes were needed to reassure a “nervous” CIA which had “started cutting back” on intelligence-sharing with the UK. This despite never discussing the issue with US authorities And A former senior CIA officer said: “the Central Intelligence Agency would never hold any information back from the British that was important to their domestic security, or to the security of their people and facilities overseas.” So, more bollox then eh? Mind you, if you've got nothing to hide...

Re: National security v freedom? : Thu Apr 05, 2012 8:55 am  

cod'ead wrote:

... A former senior CIA officer said:

“the Central Intelligence Agency would never hold any information back from the British that was important to their domestic security, or to the security of their people and facilities overseas.”

So, more bollox then eh?

Mind you, if you've got nothing to hide...

Mind, how much would you trust the CIA etc?

Re: National security v freedom? : Sat Apr 07, 2012 11:55 am  

You Choob 'Cassette Boy vs The News'

Not related to this but funny anyway, and I know how much Minty will love 1.44 onwards...

Re: National security v freedom? : Thu May 17, 2012 7:09 pm  

Met police to download and indefinitely retain mobile phone data WTF they'll be doing with it is anyone's guess but I suppose it'll keep another few rozzers off the streets and give someone else an opportunity to flog some tasty tit-bits. With what's happening at Leveson at the moment, I'm even more convinced the Met has completely disconnected from reality.

Met police to download and indefinitely retain mobile phone data WTF they'll be doing with it is anyone's guess but I suppose it'll keep another few rozzers off the streets and give someone else an opportunity to flog some tasty tit-bits. With what's happening at Leveson at the moment, I'm even more convinced the Met has completely disconnected from reality.

Re: National security v freedom? : Thu May 17, 2012 8:44 pm  

cod'ead wrote: Met police to download and indefinitely retain mobile phone data WTF they'll be doing with it is anyone's guess but I suppose it'll keep another few rozzers off the streets and give someone else an opportunity to flog some tasty tit-bits. With what's happening at Leveson at the moment, I'm even more convinced the Met has completely disconnected from reality. "Sarge, theres this bloke in Leeds who must be a bit dodgy, all he ever texts to his own daughters is the word "OK", thats all he's ever sent in a text message, ever, look we've got years worth of data on him, "OK" is all he ever puts, "Dad, pick me up now", "OK", do you think its a code Sarge ?"

cod'ead wrote: Met police to download and indefinitely retain mobile phone data WTF they'll be doing with it is anyone's guess but I suppose it'll keep another few rozzers off the streets and give someone else an opportunity to flog some tasty tit-bits. With what's happening at Leveson at the moment, I'm even more convinced the Met has completely disconnected from reality. "Sarge, theres this bloke in Leeds who must be a bit dodgy, all he ever texts to his own daughters is the word "OK", thats all he's ever sent in a text message, ever, look we've got years worth of data on him, "OK" is all he ever puts, "Dad, pick me up now", "OK", do you think its a code Sarge ?"