Poole Council spying on a family
13 April 2008, 11:21 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buckinghamshire
Posts: 2,272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
14 April 2008, 06:51 AM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Far Corfe
Posts: 3,618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its getting closer and closer to a police state. Its like East Germany before the fall of communism.
Where the state pays your friends and neighbours to inform on you.
They can also open your mail and tap your phone, read your texts and enter your home, even if youre not there..........
Where the state pays your friends and neighbours to inform on you.
They can also open your mail and tap your phone, read your texts and enter your home, even if youre not there..........
14 April 2008, 08:48 AM
#6
The truly ironic thing is that this is the very same legislation that prevents us from placing surveillance on suspected Taliban and militia members in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Trending Topics
14 April 2008, 08:57 AM
#8
i little extreme, but they were playing the system, they moved out of the catchment area just after the application deadline. No wonder they arroused suspicion.
14 April 2008, 09:09 AM
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
But yes, more and more like a police state. They should can any law that allows anyone, apart from the police with a court order, being able to enter your premises, read your mail etc. Though in this case I think they only followed them about so any private dick could have done it. I think I would have noticed something after 3 weeks though ....
Dave
14 April 2008, 09:12 AM
#10
Scooby Regular
14 April 2008, 09:15 AM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have thought you right wing types would be right up for this. 
If it was a supposed benefit thief you would be saying "good!"
You either support spying on the general public for petty crimes, or you don't - There is no middle ground.
If it was a supposed benefit thief you would be saying "good!"
You either support spying on the general public for petty crimes, or you don't - There is no middle ground.
14 April 2008, 09:16 AM
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Oh, forgot to make the real point here. Which is, if the education system in this country was so bl**dy good, this sort of thing wouldn't be necessary as all parents would be quite happy with their local school. It obviously isn't when so many people find it necessary to move house/lie about their faith/circumstances etc just to get a good education for their kids.
Dave
Dave
14 April 2008, 09:32 AM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sheffield; Rome of the North
Posts: 17,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What nonsense Pete. Its your left-wing friends who are responsible for us living on the verge of a police state.
14 April 2008, 10:16 AM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
14 April 2008, 10:37 AM
#16
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
14 April 2008, 10:51 AM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There have been all sorts of creepy things established in a sneaky manner so that we don't notice it ever since they achieved power. It is all part of the secret agenda which UB mentions and we should be very worried about it.
It is the same method which was advocated by Jean Monnet, the father of the federated Eu who said in 1947 that federation should be brought in bit by bit until it is so well established that they can say eventually that we might as well do it completely since there would be so little further difference. Its the standard procedure for modern politicians, or should I say "Lying Con Artists!" I think a more accurate term would be "despots"
Les
It is the same method which was advocated by Jean Monnet, the father of the federated Eu who said in 1947 that federation should be brought in bit by bit until it is so well established that they can say eventually that we might as well do it completely since there would be so little further difference. Its the standard procedure for modern politicians, or should I say "Lying Con Artists!" I think a more accurate term would be "despots"
Les
15 April 2008, 09:41 AM
#18
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sheffield; Rome of the North
Posts: 17,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
15 April 2008, 12:30 PM
#19
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
... if you tolerate this, then your children will be next. on your head be it. but not mine.
15 April 2008, 10:04 PM
#20
BANNED
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So true. Well said Les 
There have been all sorts of creepy things established in a sneaky manner so that we don't notice it ever since they achieved power. It is all part of the secret agenda which UB mentions and we should be very worried about it.
It is the same method which was advocated by Jean Monnet, the father of the federated Eu who said in 1947 that federation should be brought in bit by bit until it is so well established that they can say eventually that we might as well do it completely since there would be so little further difference. Its the standard procedure for modern politicians, or should I say "Lying Con Artists!" I think a more accurate term would be "despots"
Les
It is the same method which was advocated by Jean Monnet, the father of the federated Eu who said in 1947 that federation should be brought in bit by bit until it is so well established that they can say eventually that we might as well do it completely since there would be so little further difference. Its the standard procedure for modern politicians, or should I say "Lying Con Artists!" I think a more accurate term would be "despots"
Les
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post