ZOMG we need those anti-terror surveillance laws right now!

Forums › Off topic › ZOMG we need those anti-terror surveillance laws right now!

SaltyNZ

8867 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9550

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#157154 21-Nov-2014 12:12

According to these guys, terrorism deaths are as high as 10 people a year. Well... in some places. Not here. Actually, here there haven't been any. But still: 10 people a year, in places far far away. John Key, get right on that please. I'm so very frightened.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 27

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 141
Inactive user

#1180700 21-Nov-2014 12:32

In Israel its 10 innocent Palestinians a day...but no calls or moves from US to instill anti-terror laws there. More about taking rights away from Joe public, gotta wonder who is driving it all.

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#1180718 21-Nov-2014 13:03

10 a year... that's right up there with shark attacks!

But yes, terrorism (and war, and war on terror, and war on drugs, and national security, and safety) are all up there as impossible-to-argue-against reasons for doing almost anything.

Any time someone trots out one of those, you've got to think about what his real intention is.

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1180729 21-Nov-2014 13:40

SaltyNZ: According to these guys, terrorism deaths are as high as 10 people a year. Well... in some places. Not here. Actually, here there haven't been any. But still: 10 people a year, in places far far away. John Key, get right on that please. I'm so very frightened.

10 people in some place. that must be the US. as you said in NZ so far it's nil. but in Iraq it's - what, 1000 a day being slaughtered after unspeakable torture? and other places.

if you let everyone into the US or the UK without security screening I'm sure it will be in the thousands. so they have effective spying if you like.

should we spy here - is that your question?

I don't know. if your entire family was wiped out then I'm sure you would then go to the media and say why didn't they spy on everyone. but since it has never happened, we don't know whether it will.

SaltyNZ

8867 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9550

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#1180799 21-Nov-2014 14:39

joker97:

if you let everyone into the US or the UK without security screening I'm sure it will be in the thousands. so they have effective spying if you like.

I'm not advocating the end of airport security screening. Although, now that you mention it...

should we spy here - is that your question?

I don't know. if your entire family was wiped out then I'm sure you would then go to the media and say why didn't they spy on everyone. but since it has never happened, we don't know whether it will.

No. I guarantee you I will never say 'Why didn't we spy on more people?' I won't lie and pretend I wouldn't be upset. But the evidence is already very clear that wholesale spying doesn't work.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

kiwitrc

4123 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 833
Inactive user

#1180801 21-Nov-2014 14:43

SaltyNZ: But the evidence is already very clear that wholesale spying doesn't work.

Maybe not but some of those spy agencies must have an awesome collection of nudie pics.

SaltyNZ

8867 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9550

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#1180803 21-Nov-2014 14:44

kiwitrc:
SaltyNZ: But the evidence is already very clear that wholesale spying doesn't work.

Maybe not but some of those spy agencies must have an awesome collection of nudie pics.

Finally, a decent reason to spy on people!

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

Lego

Shop now for Lego sets and other gifts (affiliate link).

networkn

Networkn
32871 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15465

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1180881 21-Nov-2014 16:08

joker97:
SaltyNZ: According to these guys, terrorism deaths are as high as 10 people a year. Well... in some places. Not here. Actually, here there haven't been any. But still: 10 people a year, in places far far away. John Key, get right on that please. I'm so very frightened.

10 people in some place. that must be the US. as you said in NZ so far it's nil. but in Iraq it's - what, 1000 a day being slaughtered after unspeakable torture? and other places.

if you let everyone into the US or the UK without security screening I'm sure it will be in the thousands. so they have effective spying if you like.

should we spy here - is that your question?

I don't know. if your entire family was wiped out then I'm sure you would then go to the media and say why didn't they spy on everyone. but since it has never happened, we don't know whether it will.

Sadly for those people who like to be sarcastic and snarky around surveillance, it would take a disaster in order for them to see. Of course they will say it would make no difference if a few people died, but that is because it hasn't happened yet.

Until you have been personally involved, it's hard for some to see the problem. Hindsight is 20/20.

They will also be the ones SCREAMING that not enough was done if it actually did happen.

Then you find the equally extreme views that no matter how many people die, no rights should ever be removed from them. They are also typically the ones who don't "believe" in immunisation.

afe66

3181 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1678

Lifetime subscriber

#1180910 21-Nov-2014 16:40

I suppose for the many people have difficulty beleaving we are a security threat and get nervous about what people (our security service) do and dont have faith in the monitoring systems/people.

(I'm so glad we didnt have current anti terror legislation during the springbok tour.... a beligerant PM and the power to call protestors terrorists.)

Those anti terror law were only going to be used for "real terrorists" but then were used to arrest domestic (Maori) NZers.

The security forces were found to be breaking the law by spying on NZ citizen but rather than punish/sack anyone for their incompetance we changed the law to allow them to do what they want.

For me, I believe we would be a lot safer if we didnt seems to cuddly up the the US all the time. (Out of curiosity has we ever voted against the US when we were on the security council)

We are a tiny country in the middle of no where and it seems like sometimes we are the tiny brother following our bigger country siblings because we want to be part of the gang when in fact we might be safer doing our own thing.

But its all about saving lifes we are told so the laws must pass. But the only external terrorist event to affect us was caused by our nominal allies (the French)

If you really want to "save lives" bring in compulsary speed limiters/black box gps recorders on cars - after all if your not breaking the law you have nothing to fear......(try selling that to the population)

A.

networkn

Networkn
32871 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15465

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1180949 21-Nov-2014 17:21

afe66: I suppose for the many people have difficulty beleaving we are a security threat and get nervous about what people (our security service) do and dont have faith in the monitoring systems/people.

(I'm so glad we didnt have current anti terror legislation during the springbok tour.... a beligerant PM and the power to call protestors terrorists.)

Those anti terror law were only going to be used for "real terrorists" but then were used to arrest domestic (Maori) NZers.

The security forces were found to be breaking the law by spying on NZ citizen but rather than punish/sack anyone for their incompetance we changed the law to allow them to do what they want.

For me, I believe we would be a lot safer if we didnt seems to cuddly up the the US all the time. (Out of curiosity has we ever voted against the US when we were on the security council)

We are a tiny country in the middle of no where and it seems like sometimes we are the tiny brother following our bigger country siblings because we want to be part of the gang when in fact we might be safer doing our own thing.

But its all about saving lifes we are told so the laws must pass. But the only external terrorist event to affect us was caused by our nominal allies (the French)

If you really want to "save lives" bring in compulsary speed limiters/black box gps recorders on cars - after all if your not breaking the law you have nothing to fear......(try selling that to the population)

A.

The bottom line is it isn't just a matter of opting out of these measures. It may look like we are "cuddling" up to the US, but for a lot of things, it's a requirement and it would SEVERELY cripple our interactions with them to not be part of it. (Think trade deals, and other such fundamentals).

We are small, insignificant really, and we NEED these other countries despite what people might think, to exist in any meaningful way.

Try doing business with a bank for example, in a lot of cases, they require a declaration that your internal IT security meets a minimum standard that otherwise you would have no reasonable use for, but it's what they require to protect themselves.

If you want to do business with them, you meet the standard, or they do business with someone who will meet the requirement. It's why small businesses often have trouble doing business with much larger entities.

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1180969 21-Nov-2014 18:01

networkn: They are also typically the ones who don't "believe" in immunisation.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#1181187 22-Nov-2014 11:04

afe66:

For me, I believe we would be a lot safer if we didnt seems to cuddly up the the US all the time. (Out of curiosity has we ever voted against the US when we were on the security council)

A.

Sort of, we told the WORLD we would not allow Nuclear armed ships into NZ waters, British, US, French, Chinese, Russian all were blocked.

The backlash from this was that the USA knew in advance the French were going to bomb (i.e. commit a terrorist act) the Rainbow warrior in NZ. They chose to allow this to happen by not informing NZ. We also had trade impediments put in place with the US just as they gave China "Favoured Nation Status".

Lego

Shop now for Lego sets and other gifts (affiliate link).

floydbloke

3646 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4554

ID Verified

#1181236 22-Nov-2014 13:20

sir1963:...

The backlash from this was that the USA knew in advance the French were going to bomb (i.e. commit a terrorist act) the Rainbow warrior in NZ. They chose to allow this to happen by not informing NZ. ...

I am (rather skeptically, I must admit) interested in finding out more about this. Please can you point me to some reputable sources.

Sometimes I use big words I don't always fully understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.

hangon

398 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 41

#1181955 24-Nov-2014 10:16

what ever you do, you can't satisfy everyone. damned if you do, damned if you don't

afe66:
Those anti terror law were only going to be used for "real terrorists" but then were used to arrest domestic (Maori) NZers.

The security forces were found to be breaking the law by spying on NZ citizen but rather than punish/sack anyone for their incompetance we changed the law to allow them to do what they want.
A.

I believe that's not true.

The GCSB was not allowed to spy on NZ citizen/residents, but also required to assist the defense force, SIS and police who has a warrant in its capacity.

The law was not clear whether GCSB can carry out such duties with a warrant for another agency, and that was clarified. They could/can never do what they want without a warrant afaik.

The Terrorism Suppression Act, is mostly related to capabilities of SIS. You may argue they are all the same, but many people I talk to tend to get them confused.

gsr

112 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 30

#1182011 24-Nov-2014 11:04

joker97:
networkn: They are also typically the ones who don't "believe" in immunisation.

Comparing Ebola and the flu is probably not the best idea anyway.

BlueShift

1692 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 969

#1182014 24-Nov-2014 11:08

gsr:
joker97:
networkn: They are also typically the ones who don't "believe" in immunisation.

Comparing Ebola and the flu is probably not the best idea anyway.

True - Flu is far more virulent, and kills thousands more than Ebola, and is a far, far more realistic danger to the health and life of anybody you know.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 27