41–50 of 52 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
MY LORD, The Last time I had the honour of being in your Lordships company I will be honest. I couldn't read past this. I just couldn't. I hope you do not fail to see the point.
What's your point? Sorry, I am but a humble unAmerican and might be hard of understanding.
My inference is the reference to deference
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you implying I'm British? (I'm American.) I don't really get your comment. It sounds important, could you say it again another way?
I was implying you are British, sorry for my mistake. It seemed like a macho British thing to do to try to deflect attention from this latest scandal by saying that the US is worse. (the UK is much worse).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They show contempt for civil liberties but claim to operate within the law. Since GCHQ is specifically mentioned (and pretty much exempted) in most surveilance related laws this seems plausible. There is weakness in the oversight that GCHQ is supposed to have.
"We operate according to the law, because we are not governed by laws."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really sure why this is being down voted. But I guess it is HackerNews after all. A lot of dumb people on here.
Because the first sentence is factually and ethically incorrect, and the second sentence is not supported by the available evidence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So the NSA isn't doing this also? They're totally above board?
Honestly, the GCHQ does seem a lot more brazenly nefarious than the NSA. A lot of the shit that comes out of the mouths of GCHQ spokespersons, shows open contempt and disdain for civil liberties and due process. At the NSA, it's more like they just don't respect those things, or think fighting terrorism/drug cartels/flavor of the month, is more important. If I could choose to dismantle one or the other, I'd go with t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you be more specific about what massive reductions in Europe-wide security resulted from the publications, and how they presumably would have stopped the Charlie Hebdo attacks?
Well, just search. But even just last week there was an article from a UK minister explaining that many dozens of Paris-style attacks have already been averted in Europe as a result of GCHQ spying. But that the tide is now growing so strong, and the terrorists much more wise after the Snowden leaks, that it is basically inevitable now that the UK itself will be attacked. The terror plot/arrests in Belgium recently we…
the public is never told of the exact details of what they were plotting because otherwise that would defeat the purpose of averting a terror attack
That's not how rule of law works! If someone is accused of a crime, it is vitally important that it be described and proved in public at a trial.
We've been round this in Northern Ireland. Diplock courts, internment, etc. It's not justice and it just breeds resentment. It's completely critical to the long term success of antiterrorism that British muslims do not feel that they're going to be victims of arbitary arrest and detention.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the first sentence is factually and ethically incorrect, and the second sentence is not supported by the available evidence.
Read the news, multiple sources, and form an opinion. Like I did. Then you won't just be a HN sheep that needs citations for everything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My guess is that the UK is much worse than America based on their track record, history and handing of the Guardian documents. I don't live there or follow their politics as closely, so I don't have a list compiled for them. It should also be said that there are many other countries that assuredly ARE worse than America with regard to the treatment of journalists. I have never been interested in 'lesser of two evil'…
A bit OT: what is the connection between the various xnull n guest accounts?
The various accounts are a bit flippant of me. I tend to accumulate downvote brigades. After some time I'll notice that immediately after I post something (as in under 20 seconds) it will be downvoted several times or if a post has two digit 'karma' I will come back after some time with significantly less (though usually no new comments/discussion). In addition sometimes an account will "act oddly" - like refuse to update comments even when it is witnin the correction window or my HN tab in Chrome will be subject to regular crashes, requiring me to edit comments elsewhere and post them into HN for fear of losing edits.
Real or perceived, so far rotating accounts has seemed to deal with it fairly well. I also don't link credentials across machines (well, I try) - so you sometimes see two accounts active during the same week (never simultaneously posting however).
I've been thinking a lot about this rotation policy (solving the problem another way). Dunno.
So far as I know nobody has ever tried impersonating one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you implying I'm British? (I'm American.) I don't really get your comment. It sounds important, could you say it again another way?
I was implying you are British, sorry for my mistake. It seemed like a macho British thing to do to try to deflect attention from this latest scandal by saying that the US is worse. (the UK is much worse).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Read the news, multiple sources, and form an opinion. Like I did. Then you won't just be a HN sheep that needs citations for everything.
Saying "prove it" is the diametric opposite to being a sheep.