Mystery Plane Over London

[John Miller 4]

I have to say that I think BEB's thoughts on this are spot on. You will of course get someone who crosses the line, we are after all human. Paranoia about who's looking at who is not helpful. It is not good to ask our security services to act on our behalf with one hand tied behind their backs.

[Dai Fledermaus]

And another thing, if there is anyone up there listening to my wife's phone calls, they would hang up long before she's finished talking about the problem she's been having recently with her feet.

[Chris Bott - Moderator]

Posted by Colin Ashman on 28/07/2014 08:59:08:

And another thing, if there is anyone up there listening to my wife's phone calls, they would hang up long before she's finished talking about the problem she's been having recently with her feet.

Can you imagine that, multiplied up by the 63 million UK population, that's an awful lot of drivel that "they" (whoever they are?) would have to listen through!

You only have to watch five minutes of some of the very low brow Tv programmes, that apparently cater to the masses these days, then you start to have an idea just how mundane the overwhelming majority of phone conversations, texts and emails etc must be.

To gain any useful information, any intercepts just have to be very narrowly targeted surely? Hat's off to them I say.

[kc]

The whole newspaper phone hacking hoohah was about people evesdropping to get the truth! Bletchley Park seems to have won WW2 by eavesdropping. But the point was in each case the people being listened to thought they were invunerable because they could not be overheard. But they could. And so can we.

[Codename-John]

Posted by Colin Ashman on 28/07/2014 08:13:43:

Posted by Codename-John on 27/07/2014 16:16:10:

I wonder what how you would react if say you were sitting on a train reading a text that someone had sent you, only to notice that the person behind you was leaning over reading it too, or if some stranger just casually picked up your phone from the table and started browsing through it, reading all your messages, checking who you had spoken to, who your friends were, looking at pictures of your wife, kids, grand kids etc ? yet you don't mind about anybody sitting in an unidentified office doing it remotely. All in the name of keeping you safe from the latest boogeyman, I wonder if people used to think of the Gestapo in the same way ?

I'm safe from the boogeyman then C-J, he'll not get me. Why? Well, I have a mobile, but I hardly ever use it. I have no idea what the number is, which does cause some embarrassment whenever I'm asked for it, but the fact is that I just don't seem to need it. Most of the time when, I leave the house, I simply forget to take it with me.

SWIMBO, on the other hand, takes her phone everywhere, at home she takes it with her from room to room, she even takes it to bed " oh someone might call during the night" is her logic despite us having a landline. It's not unusual for us to turn the car around after a mile or two of a local trip, shopping perhaps, and go back home because she has forgotten her phone. Now, with her new android phone and `all you can eat data` whatever that means the spys in the skys will be working overtime over our house.

Edited By Colin Ashman on 28/07/2014 08:14:00

Where did I say your phone was the boogeyman ? I meant that you, I and everybody else in the country are spied on by shadey government agencies just for the pretences of keeping you safe from the next Boogeyman they and the media come up with to keep you all afraid and under control.

KC the newspaper Phone hacking was supposed " journalists" I use that term loosely, listening in to private answering machine messages to try and glean a story for their newspapers, nothing to do with any truth just for headlines for the front page, Bletchley Park eavesdropped on the enemy, not every single citizen, do you consider yourself an enemy of the country ?

John considering the police already have laws to covertly monitor suspects, by firstly suspecting them of something, gaining a warrant, then carrying out surveillance lawfully so how do they have "one hand tied behind their back"? as Chris says intercepts need to be targeted, so why do they need to monitor every single one of us storing all the data for 12 months, making the job that much more difficult and more expensive for the people sifting through mountains of mundane everyday texts, emails, phone conversations etc, David Cameron announced an extra £800 million funding for all this surveillance, tried to get a hospital appointment lately, your local roads in condition ? Wrexham, where I live, the council are having to cut back so much they can only afford to cut the public area grass 4 times a year, kids cant even play football cos the grass is 2 foot high on the fields, yet the government can pull £800 million out of thin air to listen to Colins wife talkin about her feet ?

Not to mention the pornographic portfolios they have reportedly keep containing saucy photo messages sent, private webcam footage etc nice work if you can get it I`d say

[Martin Whybrow]

Posted by kc on 28/07/2014 10:27:08:

The whole newspaper phone hacking hoohah was about people evesdropping to get the truth! Bletchley Park seems to have won WW2 by eavesdropping. But the point was in each case the people being listened to thought they were invunerable because they could not be overheard. But they could. And so can we.

That's a misnomer, the journalists never did eavesdrop on any phone conversations; what they did was ring peoples numbers, wait for the voicemail prompt then access the voicemail using the (usually default) PIN; no clever technology involved at all!