The UK’s latest ‘all your privacy belongs to us‘ outrage is, as Richard North so elegantly points out, EU inspired. I don’t buy the Cleggsky promises of ‘safeguards’ nor the Theresa May nonsense about snooping catching the Soham murderer. This is derived from an EU directive, and as such is like being threatened by the Head Girl at school who, in a fit of PMT psychosis, suspects others have been saying ‘bad things’ about her, and is now rushing around trying to find out who they are so she can shout at them.
My own inclination is to let the paranoia increase until said person implodes in tears, declaiming loudly that “No-one loves her” and wander away, chuckling quietly. As for the Apparatchiks and snoopers, let them hear ‘bad things’. In short invent a few. Drive the intrusive bastards and prodnoses nuts. Send the paranoid fruitcakes off on wild goose chases. If they go looking for insults, let them find what they’re looking for. Overload their system.
Tip: To avoid the ‘Four o’clock knock’ so beloved of states who can’t handle a little honest criticism, when challenged, hand over any encryption keys (after first making the ‘authorities’ wait as long as possible) then let the ‘authorities’ find nothing but innocuous messages between friends and family. Then after a suitable pause start all over again with a new set. Not that I would worry about such things, the UK Police Service is being cut to the bone and won’t be able to do anything much. Although the thought does occur that perhaps an excuse is being sought to allow European security resources to operate freely on UK soil. Much good may it do them.
For example; I think the European Union is an unsustainable bureaucratic nonsense, where affected timepleasers and political placemen play out their delusions of power by making endless rules to solve non-problems. In short, they’re corrupt barmcakes, ‘soft’ Nazis, with a less than solid grip on reality. An institutional threat to the rights of the individual. There. In writing down what is simply an opinion formed by years of observation of an institution at work, I’ve just insulted the European Union, which is apparently an ‘offence’ under EU law. Oooo, now I’m so afwaid.
Had the EU remained a mere trading bloc (Which is what it was originally sold as), I might feel more charitable towards it. But seeing as they appear to think people might be so full of ‘sedition’ (Towards a superstate to which we owe no loyalty, nor sworn any oath of fealty to) that all our electronic communications need to be monitored, then my answer can be found in the chorus of a certain Lily Allen number. To which I would add “and the horse you rode in on.”
Good gravy, in sending out directives like these, the EU administration proves itself full of people who are nothing short of creepy.
Update: Having read David Davis’s short piece in the UK’s Sun on this topic, I find myself wondering about the quality of personnel that will supposedly be vetting this new Tsunami of information. How can we be sure that one or two of them will not utilise information about families and their children for less than wholesome purposes? Can we be certain those with access to our families emails and such have no inclinations towards paedophilia and other such perversions who might abuse that position? Such people are artful in wheedling themselves into positions of trust and influence. Might it not be a better idea not to place temptation in their path in the first place?
Update 2: The Mash neatly nails it.