Following the terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo offices in Paris, everyone and their brother came in support of freedom of expression. The problem is, they do not even know what it is when asked. Meanwhile, monitoring services do not waste time trying to use the attack to demand more powers.
Not even 24 hours have passed before the British MI5 asked for more sweeping surveillance powers. In other words :. The bodies are not even cold when monitoring hawks have tried to exploit them politically
At the same time, political leaders use the opportunity to talk about civil liberties. Specifically, they talk about freedom of expression. These leaders who constantly, tenaciously and vigorously work for erode freedom of expression in their own country - directly, as in prohibiting certain political opinions or indirectly through monitoring.
All week we heard every columnist express concern about how "all the expressions that do not break the law should be allowed unconditionally" - apparently completely unaware of tautology, contradiction, and complete irony in that statement, which took hundreds of different formulations now. It is straight outta The Onion.
One of the cartoonists of Charlie Hebdo, who survived because he "hates meetings," outraged at the double standard he went on record and said:. "We vomit on all these people who say suddenly they are our friends. "
"There are a few years, thousands of people took to the streets to demonstrate against Pakistan Charlie Hebdo. They did not know what it was. Now it is the otherwise. "
This is a great example of how people who claim to be" Charlie Hebdo "are certainly not so. Charlie was an annoying voice that dared to go against the crowd and use their free speech to provoke outside the mainstream; agree with what everyone says, as is happening now is the opposite of "being Charlie Hebdo"
But the greatest danger lies in the security services, or supposedly security services, demanding more budget and power in the wake of the attack there are so many problems with this, we will try to simply list a few of them.
- First, fundamental rights are not respected. We already have a new condition monitoring orders of magnitude worse than East Germany Stasi . We must begin to comply fundamental rights such as privacy rather than the erosion of many of them.
- Second, mass surveillance appears to have arrested a total of zero terrorist attacks so far, based on the that there was no public trials and convictions for "preparing a terrorist attack" (which there would be absolutely had)
- Third, these people were already under surveillance as potential troublemakers .; they had already been selected for a closer look. Look suspicious is that the police should be done; still, it did not help here
Let's get right :. monitoring services knew very well who these guys were, and still failed to prevent the attack. Yet they require more budget and authority to do much of what not work?
I fear the fundamental rights may still need to get a lot worse before it gets better.
Privacy remains your own responsibility.
0 Komentar