George Orwells 1984?

Take your pick Odon,
http://www.google.com/search?client...s+everywhere&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

 

Oh, you mean standard CCTV camera's.
Well then that's totally different.
I thought you were just talking about facial recognition.

Try this one for the real world not the hype :

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...rotection+freedom+of+information&aq=f&aqi=&oq=

 

Standard cctv or not, all thats needed is networking and recognition software once a video feed is established. Most security services which lease cctv equipment also provide a secure feed to the police, at least here in the states. What they do with it past that point is up to them.

And I'm not saying they're necessarily being used for such purposes, but the hardware is already firmly established as a part of every day existence. Once something is accepted as commonplace and accepted by the public as normal who would bother suspecting it had other functions beyond simple public safety?

And I'm sure that data protection act does wonders for setting the peoples minds at ease regarding camera placement. Not like public officials aren't regularly caught disregarding similar directives. or that all who do so aren't caught.

 

Not quite.
The quality of the image has to be of a certain standard.
You pretty much have to stand right in front of the camera too.

Local councils have their own cameras which the police can gain access to.
The police can have access to private CCTV too.
What they do with it past that isn't up to them, though (see below).

The information commission.
http://www.ico.gov.uk/for_organisations/topic_specific_guides/cctv.aspx
CCTV User Groups.
http://www.cctvusergroup.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=18fd1e15a0ba5e93406cb96128fb09f5
The Impact of Surveillance and Data Collection upon the Privacy of Citizens and their Relationship with the State.
http://whereismydata.wordpress.com/2009/02/07/select-comitte-report-into-privacy-and-surveillance/

To name but three.

Let alone what the E.U would have to say.

The boring truth is, yes such systems could be used for nefarious BB behaviour, but there are checks and balances in place to prevent it.
Just because, say, I don't keep my finger on the pulse, as far as CCTV is concerned, over people do.
So the likelihood CCTV will be used for anything more than "public safety", is slim.

There isn't any (of any significance) authortatiian parties in this country, tbh.

 

Have you any e.gs?

 

watergate, iran contra scandal, there was a case in the late 80's / early 90's where a mess of politicians were caught misappropriating public lands and selling them off to their developer buddies for bottom dollar, sorry I don't recall the particular name of the scandal at the moment. And those are just some of which have reached the publics eye. No way to tell how much is being done that never gets discovered. Politicians are human firstly and generally have their own interests at heart before the public they are supposed to be serving.

And perhaps the decline of these things coming to the surface over the past decade or so are a sign that Politicians are behaving more scrupulously or perhaps merely an indication they've gotten better about covering their tracks?

I don't hold any concrete beliefs about political corruption but I sure know their past records don't leave us with any great reasons to trust them all too much. Better to hold suspect and stay vigilant than become complacent and accepting of our "Shepard's"

 

I hadn't quite meant those kinds of scandals, tbh.
I know there are those kinds of scandals.
There are still those types of scandals.

It's significant you mention the Iran Contra affair, as that "scandal" was perpetuated for the right reasons rather than the wrong ones, it's just it stank to high heaven with out any political context applied.

Recent scandals MP expenses to the BAE scandal

I meant in relation to the wholesale disregard for peoples privacy etc.

Yes, yes they are.
I still don't think your overall sentiments are true, though.

I suspect the emergence of 24hour news cycles means that "scandals" are uncovered, reported then spat out a lot quicker.
So we kinda forget about them.

Your e.gs and mine are generally (not totally) uncovered by other politicians or bodies set up to oversee government due diligence, in part, set up after similar "scandals" in attempt to "learn lessons" and lessons are learnt.

What I am talking about are e.gs that in some way mirror the book we are talking about, not e.gs of "scandals" that have been around since politicians were given office.
Your e.gs seem kinda irrelevant to this discussion.
There not exactly akin to the Stasi etc, are they?
I don't mean to sound dismissive, I honestly don't...but...

It might surprise you but neither do I.
I, perhaps, would give them the benefit of the doubt and do think our two governments are a lot more open, accountable and not quite as despotic as you might think they are.

 

Well it's not quite considered a scandal as yet, but the patriot act reeks of stomping all over the rights of the individuals privacy with the goal of greater public safety in mind. Unwarranted wiretapping and so forth went on for a while.
There was also a computer system being used to sniff phone communications for keywords up in Switzerland iir. Name eludes me atm,,, long day.

Didn't bring them up earlier as they weren't scandals in the clinical sense but certainly an abusive overreaching of power by government officials.

 

That's more like it.

Where is Switzerland iir?

 

irangate was illegal activity

america had told everyone else not to sell weapons to iran whilst secretely selling selling iran weapons.

oliver north was a "hero" for selling the enemies of america lots of weapons, ronald reagan said he couldn't remember anything, though you can bet george bush senior knew, considering he was the old head of the CIA.

according to odon

"It's significant you mention the Iran Contra affair, as that "scandal" was perpetuated for the right reasons rather than the wrong ones".

you can reclassify illegal activity how ever you want to in the world of 1984, illegal weapons sales are reclassified "scandals". acccording to odon it was done for the right reasons.

you see... orwell said that by changing the language you change the way people think. replace illegal with scandal and link it with the "right reasons" and you twist history in whatever direction you want to go.

chances are america is still selling weapons to iran whilst publicly complaining about iran

 

First off...I didn't say it was legal.
I did say it was a scandal that stank to high heaven.
The only thing I did was put scandal in "", you could argue I was devaluing the scandal...but that was not my intention.
I hope "It stank to high heaven" conveyed it wasn't exactly the most diplomatically sensitive of things to do..but I do stick by my assertion it was for the right reasons.

If I were to say it was for a "arms-for-hostages deal" that is adding the political context...and that is why I said it was for the "right reasons".

I was only giving my opinion like you do.
So, it's a little hypocritical of you to make the accusations you are.
You, perhaps, should re-read some of your post sometime.

Aside from the fact it violated embargo's etc why was it "for the wrong reasons"?

Perhaps.
The relationship that America has with Iran isn't an easy narrative to write.

 

:rofl:

Right by Italy omg and next door to France wtf

I kept thinking the name was ENAC (1st computer,,, :coffee: )
http://duncan.gn.apc.org/echelon-dc.htm

http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/featured/conversations-intercepted-truth-project-echelon/8773

 

I wondered what "iir" meant - it threw me.
It also threw me because I thought we were talking about the US/UK.
I thought "iir" was an abbreviation of a US state.
I know where THAT Switzerland is :rofl:

I'll look into the links you posted. Thanks. I think

 

Thats just where I was thinking the station was. On further research, it seems quite multinational and there are a number of stations worldwide.

It got quite a bit of media attention in the early 00's but the story as most typically do, lost public interest and officials rattled off a number of reassurances as to why "no one should be alarmed, and how it was all for the sake of public safety / national security,,,

 

I recognised the place when I looked it up.
I know what you are talking about now.

(SIGINT) collection and analysis network operated on behalf of the five signatory states to the UK-USA Security Agreement (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States, known as AUSCANZUKUS).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echelon_(signals_intelligence)#Controversy

It's a good e.g, no doubt.
Reading up on things like that what always strikes me is the boring fact that large scale reports and investigations are done on them.
I wonder if large scale investigative reports are orchestrated by the EU etc etc is mirrored in 1984

 

Well as there are all sorts of levels of governmental security within Orwells book then I'd have to say thats half the premise of the bb thing, people always over one anothers shoulder, making sure everyones in step with the "nwo". And yes large scale reports and so forth are done, but always with a degree of restricted access. there are some examples given of cases in which this system has been misused by public officials for political purposes.

And again "officials rattled off a number of reassurances as to why "no one should be alarmed, and how it was all for the sake of public safety / national security,,," If you choose to take them at their word then there is of course no need for alarm or suspicion is there. I mean why would the EU blow the whistle on itself if ultimately the goals of this program serve it's purposes?

 

Oh, yeah...certainly. It boggles the mind some of it.
It's too individualistic rather than collectivist though.
(I mean one person or three rather than a mass of people or gov')

To a certain extent I do take them at their word.
People say that's my problem.
I'm just not very conspiratorial, tbh.
There just seems to be too much official documents about everything...when there isn't any need for them to say anything really.
Plus if you listen to the EU council meetings it's worse than primary school...nobody gets on and it takes them forever to come out with a coherent message.
I do struggle to think that they (member states) are all being watched from every angle (by other member states and other "actors") and each state is pouring out their own details about themselves and others...and they're doing it all to serve some negative agenda? mmmmm.

I guess the notion of "super-states" :
1 Oceania 2 Eurasia 3 Eastasia
...Is occurring somewhat. I can agree with that aspect.

 

But was BB really so collective or was it simply the workings of a smaller groups political agenda? Theres so much which is left to the imagination in Orwell's book as to the inner workings of the Government. And while the individual cases irl seem to be individualistic, how individualistic is it when the individual in question is one of the leaders of these collective nations and is acting as a means to make sure that those they are investigating are "on board" with their greater national plans?

It's not to say that the majority of abuses aren't self interested in nature but not all are. And while the EU may seem a royal clusterfuck of disassociated interests in meetings, those who have less know full well that when in need of assistance from those with more they will need to play ball or find the foreign aid rather limited or perhaps find their nation to be the latest hotbed of AlQuaeda activity.

Sort of how like in the U.S. when individual states dont agree on policy yet are sort of "willfully coerced" into compliance with Federal desires through the threat of funding cut's to the state in question as has been done numerous times over Marijuana and speed limit laws to name a couple instances.

And of course we're not looking for any perfect mirror images here, it would be foolish to think they would be so stupid as to make anything quite so obvious wouldn't it?

 

Interesting thoughts. I need to go home now so I'll catch up with this in the morning.

 

Btw, I'm re-reading segments of the book.
You raised the best argument so far...so I wanted to refresh my memory of the book.
I'm also pulling a few phrases etc from it too...
They might seem meaningless but they garnered some (I think) interesting snippets of info

E.g: Ninth Three-Year Plan.