Is anyone else more worried about M15 than about terrorism.

[batshitlady]

That's it really. The state wants ever more surveillance power, ever more restriction on freedom of speech and even, in universities, freedom of thought. It seems to me that it's in their nature to ask for more powers and restrictions to our freedoms and privacy. Are we just going to let them have it???

Mnhq should make a "encrypted text only" forum lol

Believe me, coming here as a first timer, it was all in code ....

My phones keyboard quite often scrambles the words that I'm saying to the point where I wager it would give GCHQ supercomputer clusters a run for their money at times.

Alternatively, one could go very old school, and take advantage of the horribly limited education of the average intelligence officer ...

of sin praktice in failing to furrow theogonies of the dommed).
Trisseme, the mangoat! And the name of the Most Marsiful,
the Aweghost, the Gragious one! In sobber sooth and in souber
civiles? And to the dirtiment of the curtailment of his all of man?
Notshoh?
BUTT (maomant scoffin, but apoxyomenously deturbaned but
thems bleachin banes will be after making a bashman's haloday out
of the euphorious hagiohygiecynicism of his die and be diademmed).
Yastsar! In sabre tooth and sobre saviles! Senonnevero! That
he leaves nyet is my grafe. He deared me to it and he dared me
do it, and bedattle I didaredonit as Cocksnark of Killtork can
tell and Ussur Ursussen of the viktaurious onrush with all the
rattles in his arctic! As bold and as madhouse a bull in a meadows.
Knout Knittrick Kinkypeard! Olefoh, the sourd of foemoe
times! Unknun! For when meseemim, and tolfoklokken rolland
allover ourloud's lande, beheaving up that sob of tunf for to
claimhis, for to wollpimsolff, puddywhuck. Ay, and untuoning
his culothone in an exitous erseroyal Deo Jupto.At that instullt
to Igorladns! Prronto! I gave one dobblenotch and I ups with
my crozzier. Mirrdo! With my how on armer and hits leg an
arrow cockshock rockrogn. Sparro!

Do I worry ? honestly no not really , MI5 will be watching all those in charge far more than me , they are welcome to join me on my daily travels , they may need to sign confidentiality forms and wear visitor badges , which may be something new to them , but I am sure they will cope.

Are they afraid of me ? not in the slightest , are they afraid of my children ? no more than I am ! Will there be a massive uprising and revolution in years to come ? I very much doubt it , people won't be ablt to spare the time off from work whilst saving 30 years for a house deposit ;)

"Do I worry ? honestly no not really , MI5 will be watching all those in charge far more than me"

Everyone is watched, literally everyone. In the days of the GDR and the Stasi, their powers will restrained somewhat by the fact that they didn't have the ability to monitor everyone - Although they gave it a good shot. These days the technology is easily available for intelligence agencies to automatically read through all of our communications, setting up definitions for what is suspicious activity and will get flagged by the system. How can we trust these people not to abuse what they have? If someone in a position of power makes moves to curtail GCHQ or MI5 or MI6, it would be trivial for those agencies to dig around inside that persons private life and find some blackmail material.

They say that that humans only review the data when there are grounds to do it, but I think this is wrong. There wasn't any grounds to collect the data in the first place, so its irrelevant whether you find anything incriminating because the searching of the communications was itself groundless. That's conducting searches without grounds, in order to find grounds, to then justify your actions. To put it into a physical analogy it's like a police officer searching everyone in town simply because the odds are that someone in the crowd must be up to something illegal. He searches everyone for no reason, finds someone in possession of drugs, then uses those drugs as grounds to arrest and further investigate the person. He can argue that he only took action against someone when there were grounds to do so, but the only reason he found those grounds was because of an unreasonable search. That in my opinion should see the entire case thrown out, otherwise it doesn't deter police officers from abusing their power in this manner.

I totally agree, DontHave.