June 30, 2012

Nothing To Hide?

Actually, yes. Yes I do.

But rather than tell you the whole story of why, just read this.

Here's a snippet:

"What do I have to hide? Everything! Which is to say, every piece of personal information someone or something demands to know is something I don’t want to tell because no one has the right to demand access to my life.

The right to privacy rests largely on a presumption of innocence. It assumes that — in the absence of evidence of wrongdoing — an individual has a right to shut his front door and tell other people (including government) to mind their own business.

Today, this assumption has been twisted inside out so that a desire for privacy means you have something to hide. You are expected to prove your innocence by revealing every financial transaction, by filling in pages of government paperwork, by allowing state agents to frisk your person and property when you board a plane or enter a public building. These invasions rest upon the presumption of guilt.

Privacy is also is the single most effective means of preserving freedom against an encroaching state. The act of closing your front door expresses the key distinction between the private and public spheres."

The drones will shit themselves when they read the whole thing.

The free-thinkers and freedom-lovers will nominate Wendy for an award. (Which she deserves for this fantastic piece).



Privacy- yeah but no but said...

a luuvvely dreamy freedom idea totally removed from the real world.

Your personal information means you get loans, mortgages, health care, education, pensions, the proof you own the title deeds to your house, it controls immigration, gives you social security benefits, the list is endless.

of course the full article says as much in its muddled privacy yes but no but yes but no shite.

yeah but no but.

Wake up freedom drones if you are hiding from your debt this shite aint going to help convince you of anything.

Privacy yeah but no but said...

these snippets shows the yeah but no but better if you don't want to read the whole thing

"What do I have to hide? Everything! Which is to say, every piece of personal information someone or something demands to know is something I don’t want to tell because no one has the right to demand access to my life".

"At this point, it is useful to take a “time out” to assert that the collection of data and issuance of documents can be a valid function of a free society".

collection of data...lol.

that was the lightbulb moment for wendy.

Anonymous said...

I particularly enjoyed the highly comedic first 2 comments above of someone who has mastered the art of typing whilst either a)asleep, b)possessed by demonic forces, c)comatose and/or d)has the enviable "talent" of being capable of "quoting" script from (so im informed)a TV series, but no, but yes he does...Maybe next time he/she could just respond by typing in the lyrics of bah bah black sheep. Meh.

Anyway, back to the real world; that was a very interesting piece and one in which i have embarked upon with HMRC myself ie refusal to divulge information and as such was a timely boost to my confidence...Bah ;)@Pricacy yeah but...i think your lightbulb filament is irrevocably broken-time to change it (if you can see in the dark...or eat more carrots).

Pete said...

I think the article talks about balance more than anything. Of course we all have to share a certain amount of personal information depending on what we are doing. However the crux of it is that the state believes that it has the right to all of our personal data, which they do not.

And to dickie double dickhead, go fuck yourself.

William said...

This is the best bit for me and its in the comments not that excellent article.

As Thomas Jefferson himself once said: “Every man should have at least one alias!”

Clearly commenter number one on this thread reads Thomas Jefferson!

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear, my arse! said...

Privacy- yeah but no

If you don't believe in individual privacy then please post your full name, bank account details, home address and any other useful private information. I'm also sure you'll post anything illegal you've done, after all the state needs to know

Privacy yeah but no but said...

i do believe in individual privacy that is why my details are not plastered all over the web, no facebook,no twitter, no blogs,no websites, nothing but nothing cos i believe in indvidual privacy, but at the same i recognise "government/society" functions for folk when they have personal information.

What about the author of privacy "Wendy McElroy", take a look at her wiki, her biography , her interviews, her images ,every last bloody detail of her life.

all found in 2 minutes,give me another couple of minutes and i could be talking to her on her phone.

Privacy my arse.

yeah but no but.

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear, my arse! said...

So Pybn, you believe in individual privacy, but do you believe the state needs all your personal data, everything, who you talk to what you say, how you spend your money etc etc or do you think that only a limited amount of info is required. It's about balance, that which is required for a state to function and the rest being none of its business. It's an individual's choice to share other information not the states. If Wendy chooses to share info that's up to her.

Anonymous said...

What the ****??!!

At 09:30 this morning 2 police cars and 4 policemen from Merseyside Police arrested British Constitution Group Chairman Roger Hayes at his Wirral home and drove away. The first his family heard of him was at 18:30 this evening via a telephone call from a Warder in Liverpool prison, to say that Roger had been tried and sentenced to prison. At no time were the family or any other members of the public informed of his arrest, and it is understood that he was tried in a secret court without a Jury.


We have all heard of summary justice – and while details have yet to emerge – it is incredible that in what is supposed to be a democracy someone can be arrested at 09;30 and by 18;30 the same day be imprisoned (sentence unknown at this time). It is understood that such an example of summary justice can be witnessed somewhere like North Korea – but in England?

Is this the nadir to which our country has sunk?

Original Article at Witterings from Witney http://witteringsfromwitney.com/what-the/#comment-1239