Governed by idiots, policed by cultists?
Just time for a quick post about two very troubling stories that have appeared in the last day. The first is a report in the Times which reveals that Ministers are to consider plans for a database holding details of every phone call and e-mail sent in the UK.
A massive government database holding details of every phone call, e-mail and time spent on the internet by the public is being planned as part of the fight against crime and terrorism.
Now anyone with an ounce of intelligence can see that if - and what a gigantic ‘if’ that is - this plan were actually implemented, it would have pretty much zero impact in stopping terrorism. There are just so many ways around it, such as pay-as-you-go mobiles, pay phones, sat-phones, internet cafes, VPNs to offshore servers and even old fashioned letters and face-to-face meetings, that no serious terrorist would be deterred by it.
If the Government did have a database of all phone calls, emails and “time spent on the internet” (what does that mean anyway?) would they be able to resist the temptation to start data mining, profiling and scanning people’s communications to look for suspicious patterns, rather than performing targeted searches of known suspects? They can do the latter now anyway. Hmmm, total surveillance society anyone? So much for Article 12 of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Of course such a system would present some massive technological challenges, and we know what the Government’s track record is like when it comes to large-scale IT projects. And they’re not so hot at protecting our personal data either, are they? One would think that the merest mention of the word “database” would have Ministers running a mile by now, but sadly these ill-conceived IT ‘panaceas’ still seem to make them cream their pants. Still, least it would be a nice little earner for the likes of EDS.
Even if the whole story is just a bit of kite flying by the Home Office, the fact that anyone could contemplate floating the idea scares the hell out of me. I particularly liked this comment on the Times article by Alan Black:
I think someone ought to point out to the government that 1984 was meant as a critique and a warning, not a blueprint.
The second WTF! story today concerns the teenager facing prosecution for calling Scientology a ‘cult’.
The unnamed 15-year-old was served the summons by City of London police when he took part in a peaceful demonstration opposite the London headquarters of the controversial religion.
Officers confiscated a placard with the word “cult” on it from the youth, who is under 18, and a case file has been sent to the Crown Prosecution Service.
That’s despite a judge sitting at the Old Bailey previously stating that
Scientology is both immoral and socially obnoxious…It is corrupt sinister and dangerous. It is corrupt because it is based on lies and deceit and has its real objective money and power for Mr. Hubbard… It is sinister because it indulges in infamous practices both to its adherents who do not toe the line unquestionly and to those who criticize it or oppose it. It is dangerous because it is out to capture people and to indoctrinate and brainwash them so they become the unquestioning captives and tools of the cult, withdrawn from ordinary thought, living, and relationships with others.
As is so often the case, the Register came up with the funniest take on the story - their caption for the photo of the police confiscating the placard was “PC plodette extends the long tentacle arm of Xenu the law”.
Is it just me, or does the City of London police seem a little too cosy with the Scientologists? Perhaps Scientology is the new Freemasonry?
(If you have never seen it, you must watch the South Park illustration of what Scientologists actually believe.)
I find arresting the young lad on the other a hand of the extreme although tolerance for other religious ideals must be observed and safeguarded by all !its unfair to label what is not acceptable to self as a cult sometimes based on heresy or ignorance
Hi Nairobian, thanks for taking the time to comment. I certainly think that we all need to be more tolerant of others, and also that people should be free to practice their religious beliefs - so long as they aren’t hurting or exploiting other people. However, I also think it’s important that freedom of speech is safeguarded too, and that includes the right to criticise other’s views, so long as it’s not done in a way that incites hatred or violence.
In this instance, I think there is plenty of evidence to suggest that Scientology could be labelled a cult rather than a religion. That was certainly the opinion of a British court anyway.
Yes, and terrorists will of course use keywords like bomb, terrorism etc in their email and telephone exchanges so that the database will be such a great way for the government to track them…