You have got to be either joking, haven't actually read any of the reasons put forward including the articles in the links I posted earlier in the thread or you really are a bit thick! That isn't meant to be an insult by the way. More of a despairing comment that anyone could be so naive to think the information gathered will not be misused either accidentally or deliberately to the detriment of people in this country.



The fact you don't care they can see you in your bondage gear or whatever is not the problem. It's when that is published for the world to see your life is affected. Why don't you get this?

Which is an interesting illustration, because we can see exactly the sort of impact that such a thing would have via the case of Max Mosely.



He does something that is not illegal and does not contradict anything he's said or done in public life (so there's no hypocrisy argument). But the result of the [iNOTW[/i splashing his [uprivate[/u life all over the front page for the titilation of millions may quite possibly have been a factor in his son's subsequent suicide, while his employers seek to sack him on the basis of the revelations.



And then there's the case of Simon Walsh – #PornTrial, as it became known – who has lost his career because (in all likelihood), for political reasons, his sexual preferences (again, nothing illegal) were used to prosecute him. He was subsequently cleared (summary of that case [url=http://thevoluptuousmanifesto.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/porntrial-masking-real-questions.htmlhere[/url: pic may not be considered work safe).



In this particular case, an 'expert' for the police even claimed that wearing a gas mask (as featured in one photograph that Walsh had) was very bad, since it could cause serious harm to the wearer – even death by asphyxiation. That in itself is some illustration of how the police can behave with private information.



I actually know of a similar case where the person involved was not famous, and was sacked because someone decided to reveal to their employer their predilection for a spot of consensual S&M in their own, personal time.



But privacy is unimportant and only those with something to hide need be afraid – and the authorities would never, ever, ever do anything detrimental with or as a result of such information.

So it would be okay for the ruling government to pry into every aspect of their political opponents?



The police officer who has decided you're not man enough for your wife and he wants her, you want him to have access to these snooping facilities?



The 8 year old girl who has just been murdered near your house. You were seen by CCTV cameras in the building at the approximate time of her death. Your DNA has supposedly been found at the crime scene. Your skin was found under the fingernails of the victim. Do you think that anyone will believe your protestations that you've been fitted up?

The example I gave above of the case of Simon Walsh: he had been involved in disciplinary procedures against police officers. There has certainly been speculation that those details of his private life were used in an attempt to get rid of him.

BECAUSE NORMAL PEOPLE VALUE THEIR BLOODY PRIVACY!!!



I get it. You would not care if a government team was seconded to have an agent within 1 metre of you throughout your entire life, with a recording device. You go for a , he's there. Sit watcj=hing tv, he's there. You go to bed, he watches whatever you do there. You spend time on the internet, he is there watching everything you do. He listens to every conversation, personal or electronic. He reads all your mail. You go out for a good session, he's sat next to you. You go on holiday, he's in the next seat, and he shares your room. He goes sightseeing with you, in the pool he's there, as you apply the factor 15 to yourself and your missus, he's closely watching. You go to your GP for various personal problems, he's there in the examination room. Your relative dies, there he is at the service, and the graveside, and the wake.



I could, of course, go on ad infinitum, but if you really want to try to convince me you would be perfectly cool with all this, then you are quite, quite mad, so there would be no point.

He should really apply factor 30 if he's going to be sitting by the pool.

Do you ever masturbate? Or have sex? Maybe you like certain activities that might be described as 'non-mainstream'?

Can they really do all that ?



Is that the explanation for the scarecrow in my garden who's eyes follow you around when you're cutting the grass, I have no idea how it got there or even when it first appeared.

They've had to come up with something new now that those pictures of Jesus, with eyes that are said to follow you (a deeply mystical thing, it was implied when I was young and there was one in my bedroom) are not in as many homes.

I can't imagine many blow-up dolls requiring sun screen

There's only one thing crazier than Saddened and that's taking his shtick seriously.

I'm comforted by knowing the British constitution will protect me against snooping and such like and the relevant sections will be scrutinised openly and fairly by the relevant powers who police the executive.



There are however. perhaps, at least several reasons why that may not be the case.



Perhaps it is time to look at the overall comfort zone of the current political set up in this country and realise that at best it is bad and is so corrupt and biased that it will never change.



It still leaves me wondering though why people still like a monarchy and believe in aristocracy rather than meritocracy, the former being why we are in the mess we are.