Further to my preceding post on government monitoring of all electronic communications and to the gasps of Shlock-Horror from the usual liberal hypocrites who love using governmental powers to beat you up if you break one of their beloved shibboleths on race or colour, forgive me if I yawn! Acording to them it was going to be the culmination of George Orwell's prophecies when camerers were placed in public places but the only result has been an increase in police arrests following outbreaks of public disorder or criminality. So what's not to like about that?
The same applies to monitoring communications but if you don't like the idea of your late night, computer visits to 'Pussy Galore's Delights' then don't go there. Or, if you really cannot resist the urge, then keep going happy in the knowledge that your infinitesimally tiny number of electronic bytes will be the equivalent of four snowflakes in Russia in the winter. Unless, of course, one of Pussy Galore's 'gels' gets bumped off suddenly, in which case the plod will be quickly at your door - and quite right, too! And if that's embarrassing, well, tough!
That, of course, is a trivial possibility compared to the all too real dangers and potential tragedies that are being plotted even as I write. I would rather risk losing my dignity by being exposed as 'Pussy Galore's oldest customer, in all senses of the word, than have bits blown off me in a tube train. In fact, I would prefer it to reading about other people having bits blown off them, too. And I would remind so-called liberals that semtex is soooo 20th century now! In the future, the weapon-of-choice for your urban terrorist is likely to be infinitely more serious and far-reaching in its consequences than anything we have seen so far.
Yes, of course, no-one trusts governments but all that is needed are some simple and effective safeguards. For instance (and I don't suppose this is comprehensive), the legislation should make it crystal clear as to which suspected crimes and misdemeanours would allow a person's electronic records to be investigated. Inside the security agencies, only specific and senior officers should be able to give consent to such investigations and they should be warned that they personally will be held legally accountable for their decisions. In other words, no more hiding behind a minister who, we all know, hasn't a clue! At this stage, we are dealing with intelligence matters rather than legal ones and so the basis for proceding with an investigation should be 'reasonable suspicion', not 'reasonable proof'. Obviously, any unauthorised investigation, or release of information, not concerned with the sort of matters covered under the Act would be a criminal offence with severe penalties.
Over 3,000 people were slaughtered on 9/11 and many more injured. I am not being flippant when I suggest that "you ain't seen nuthin' yet"!