• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: Shambles

UK's new internet laws, are we going to lose our anonymity, and become as heavily censored and monitored as China, North Korea, Russia etc?

Digital IDs are an even worse step, with it looking increasing likely that Kier Stalin wants to push them through

Not sure if everyone signing the petition will make any difference, but it might do if there ends up being a significant number

petition.parliament.uk

Petition: Do not introduce Digital ID cards

We demand that the UK Government immediately commits to not introducing a digital ID cards. There are reports that this is being looked at.
petition.parliament.uk petition.parliament.uk
 
The thing is - for YEARS a passport was the only acceptable proof of id. So one could argue that they have effectively got all that data already - and WE paid for it.

I had no ID and quite a few businesses begen to offer 'Citizencard' or similer sounding products. But banks won't accept them as ID (for example) and I'm told that many pubs wouldn't even accept it as proof that someone was 18 simply because all of those companies would accept a birth certificate as proof... and ANYONE can obtain a copy of ANYONES birth certificate.
 
The justification Kier Stalin is using for the proposal is extremely weak. He's saying it will prevent illegal immigrants from being able to obtain work.

Well Durh, doesnt he realise that because these people have none of the already plentiful forms of relevant IDs required for on-the-books work (Visas, British passports, driving licences, NI numbers) that they will be working in the off the books, cash in hand economy anyway. Making the proposals completely irrelevant and ineffective for that purpose. No one is going to ask them for their Digital ID card in those sort of jobs lol.

The government must be so stupid and naive if they don't know that.

But they must do, and the whole scenario can only be a smoke screen, trying to appear as if they are doing something about the illegal immigration issue that is obviously the hottest of political topics right now, in order to try to gain public approval via their blatantly transparent smoke screen. Trying to tie 2 things together that just don't fit together.

It's clearly not about illegal immigrants, its about the control and monitoring of the rest of the population.
 
Last edited:
I remember this was proposed by the last Labour government in 2006 and eventually scrapped in 2010. The current plans couldn't be implemented until 2028 at the earliest, which will probably be an election year. So kicked further into the long grass, or even scrapped again.

For the moment, I wouldn't take it as a given. As it'd be free to all eligible individuals, the cost would be phenomenal and probably far more than we lose in taxes from illegal workers. Especially once we hand over a contract to the private sector and the cost balloons out of control.

There is evidence that countries with ID card systems are less appealing to illegal migrants, but the black economy will always find a way.

But as for those who think this is the slippery slope to some Chinese-style social credit scheme, I think they overestimate the state's actual ability to implement such a system, let alone a desire to do so.
 
Last edited:
The British state can be incredibly competent when it's doing something it actually cares about. See the super fast arrests and convictions re last years riots.

The problem is that it simply doesn't care about most things that lower the average plebs quality of life. Thinking that they're incompetent when literally 0% of burglaries in your town were solved over the course of a year is an easy mistake to make. But they're not incompetent, they simply couldn't give a toss.

And yeah, re the employment of illegal immigrants, there are already strict laws and checks regarding this and have been for years. The employers who already don't check proof of right to work aren't going to be foiled by the introduction of StarmerCard.
 
I find it amazing that it seems like collective amnesia has set in. GCHQ developed both MtI (Mastering the Internet) and Tempora YEARS ago. Of COURSE ALL digital traffic is monitored! Why did you assume otherwise? Unlike a letter or package, no warrent is needed to tap into digital traffic.

I might add that even snailmail CAN be redirected which is why you want cut-outs.
 
4DQSAR said:
I find it amazing that it seems like collective amnesia has set in. GCHQ developed both MtI (Mastering the Internet) and Tempora YEARS ago. Of COURSE ALL digital traffic is monitored! Why did you assume otherwise? Unlike a letter or package, no warrent is needed to tap into digital traffic.

I might add that even snailmail CAN be redirected which is why you want cut-outs.
Click to expand...
Yeah I gathered things were being monitored for serious public dangers like terrorism and some other categories of crime.

IIRC, Salman Abedi, the Manchester Arena suicide bomber, was flagged on several occasions, I can't recall by whom, or what agencies, or if GCHQ was one of them.

But for w/e reason no action was taken and nothing was followed up.

The thing with the new digital IDs is that everyone will have everything they do monitored and tracked by these digital ID apps, that will apparently act like spyware, once the app is installed on people's phones.

Whereas previously I thought it was only certain types of serious criminal activities that were being monitored.
 
Bleaney said:
Yeah I gathered things were being monitored for serious public dangers like terrorism and some other categories of crime.

IIRC, Salman Abedi, the Manchester Arena suicide bomber, was flagged on several occasions, I can't recall by whom, or what agencies, or if GCHQ was one of them.

But for w/e reason no action was taken and nothing was followed up.

The thing with the new digital IDs is that everyone will have everything they do monitored and tracked by these digital ID apps, that will apparently act like spyware, once the app is installed on people's phones.

Whereas previously I thought it was only certain types of serious criminal activities that were being monitored.
Click to expand...
I don't think individual threats have been taken seriously until recently. Hopefully that's changed.

I do know that most groups are infiltrated to fuck though. The New IRA got a mass text message sent to every known member and associate not long ago. I'd imagine there are operatives in a lot of mosques too.
 
Bleaney said:
IIRC, Salman Abedi, the Manchester Arena suicide bomber, was flagged on several occasions, I can't recall by whom, or what agencies, or if GCHQ was one of them.

But for w/e reason no action was taken and nothing was followed up.
Click to expand...

What does that tell us? That while yes, everything CAN be read - there is simply so much traffic, it's impossible to reliably detect even the most dangerous.

What people think and what people say can be two entirely diffrent things.
 
4DQSAR said:
What does that tell us? That while yes, everything CAN be read - there is simply so much traffic, it's impossible to reliably detect even the most dangerous.

What people think and what people say can be two entirely diffrent things.
Click to expand...
And especially what they do. I've known actual right wing extremists (don't keep that company anymore) who end up getting along with the non-white people they interact with, yet go home and rant about 'the blacks and the Pakis' with their mates.
 
Perkins : Reborn said:
And especially what they do. I've known actual right wing extremists (don't keep that company anymore) who end up getting along with the non-white people they interact with, yet go home and rant about 'the blacks and the Pakis' with their mates.
Click to expand...

Yeah. It's sometimes shizophrenic It's crazy when people's view is 'I hate all non-whites apart from all the one's I've met, who were fine.'

It's simply the designation of an 'other' who are responsibile for all of societies ills on the basis that WE aren't responsible for any of it, obviously.

People who define themselves by what they hate aren't rational BUT do self-organize in a manner that makes them a crude tool that some people are prepared to use.
 
Perkins : Reborn said:
And especially what they do.
Click to expand...
Yeah, although even 'intent to commit' certain things can also be a crime. Obviously things like someone sneaking around back terraces late at night equipped with all the tools required for burglary is grounds for arrest and prosecution. AFAIK. (Provided they don't have a plausible honest reason of course.)

And I'm sure the same applies for many other types of offences, especially plotting acts of terrorism.

Stating something online is not the same as doing it obviously. And there must be cases where people are just full of b/s, and that could be their defence?

I guess proving serious intent is what it's about, re terrorist plots etc.

Obvious hot topics these days are attempts to organise any kind of criminal activity like mass looting online. Put anything like that on your social media, bullshitting or not, and the person's probably going to be doing jail time. There's a huge amount of people getting jailed these days for what they post on social media. It's kind of crazy to some extent, and it's highly contentious and debatable where the line should be drawn, imo, re 'offensive or hateful comments' on the grounds of race or sexual orientation or gender identity. I know disability is also a 'protected characteristic' in some contexts, but not sure if it also is in this context.

My knowledge of the law is not what I'd like it to be, I've just picked up bits and pieces here and there, but never really seriously studied the subject in any depth. Although I have at least looked at most drug based legislation, on a kind of need to know basis.
 
Last edited:
Jnowhere said:
This BS will happen globally
Click to expand...

Has been global for over a decade.

BTW I note even some US states have what is mostly termed 'fighting talk' i.e. inciting immediate violence. That 'shouting fire in a crowded movie theatre' trope still means that harm MUST occur and even if it does, it's a misdemenour. Now trying to overthrow an elected government is sedition, which I believe is still a felony. Now I'm not going to suggest what the Don said/did on January 6th was or wasn't sedition - I'm not a US citizen. But mark me well, the charge of sedition WILL be leveled at anyone who is merely critical of his rule.
 
Last edited:
I mean obviously yes; but what is coming could be really bad. I just keep hearing "Think of the children". " Stop crime" and other BS lies to implement a global dictatorship.

Global ID's and a cashless society; means a future Global dictatorship. George Orwell would not be shocked at alll the BS that could be used to turn this world into a Global marxist oligarchy run by a handful of 'elites'.
 
Bleaney said:
Yeah, although even 'intent to commit' certain things can also be a crime. Obviously things like someone sneaking around back terraces late at night equipped with all the tools required for burglary is grounds for arrest and prosecution. AFAIK. (Provided they don't have a plausible honest reason of course.)

And I'm sure the same applies for many other types of offences, especially plotting acts of terrorism.

Stating something online is not the same as doing it obviously. And there must be cases where people are just full of b/s, and that could be their defence?

I guess proving serious intent is what it's about, re terrorist plots etc.

Obvious hot topics these days are attempts to organise any kind of criminal activity like mass looting online. Put anything like that on your social media, bullshitting or not, and the person's probably going to be doing jail time. There's a huge amount of people getting jailed these days for what they post on social media. It's kind of crazy to some extent, and it's highly contentious and debatable where the line should be drawn, imo, re 'offensive or hateful comments' on the grounds of race or sexual orientation or gender identity. I know disability is also a 'protected characteristic' in some contexts, but not sure if it also is in this context.

My knowledge of the law is not what I'd like it to be, I've just picked up bits and pieces here and there, but never really seriously studied the subject in any depth. Although I have at least looked at most drug based legislation, on a kind of need to know basis.
Click to expand...
The law doesn't seem to matter anymore in your country and mine. Throw in Canada and other parts of the West and a global disaster is looming. Lawlessness will increase and governments will fall.
 
Many of the dystopian scenarios that were predicted in the likes of 1984, Brave New World, and Fahrenheit 451, have either come to be in place, or soon will be.

It's absolutely terrifying. Just on the grounds of state propaganda, control of access to information and censorship, and personal privacy. Even if you're 100% clean in terms of being law abiding, you're still going to have your freedoms eroded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top