Reminds me of something similar here in USA: Homeland Defense/Security. Citizens having telephone and internet use monitored without search warrants on the off chance that a terrorist or two might be caught that way, is to protect *our* security? And there is no end in sight to the long lines to board the airplanes, while there is little or no security for those with direct access -- like baggage handlers, catering trucks, aircraft workers, janitors, flight attendants and pilots, the guys who sweep the runways . . . (ad infinitem)
Sanity and uncommon good sense seem to have gone the way of the Dodo.
Posted by
Andy, Denver on December 30, 2008:
I wonder if the "Human Rights and Data Protection Acts" are as poorly worded as some of our laws - the police may not actually have much choice in this; it may be Parliament who are exhibiting bad judgment.
Winner: The Public Be Damned - Comments
Posted by LD, Ohio on December 25, 2007:
Who is protecting whom from what?
Reminds me of something similar here in USA: Homeland Defense/Security. Citizens having telephone and internet use monitored without search warrants on the off chance that a terrorist or two might be caught that way, is to protect *our* security? And there is no end in sight to the long lines to board the airplanes, while there is little or no security for those with direct access -- like baggage handlers, catering trucks, aircraft workers, janitors, flight attendants and pilots, the guys who sweep the runways . . . (ad infinitem)
Sanity and uncommon good sense seem to have gone the way of the Dodo.
Posted by Andy, Denver on December 30, 2008:
I wonder if the "Human Rights and Data Protection Acts" are as poorly worded as some of our laws - the police may not actually have much choice in this; it may be Parliament who are exhibiting bad judgment.
Read the article that everyone's commenting on, or post a comment about it.