A final leap towards total surveillance in Finland? Is this for real?

Yesterday I read a very disturbing article concerning the Police and their right to develop and install spyware on private citizen's computers.

In the article one of F-Secure's national employees, Mikko Hyppönen, stated that the situation is schizophrenic. Although he could understand the point in overall, he said that it would really be a huge violation of privacy. The article also stated that this would be possible in the year of 2014.

I totally agree with Mr. Hyppönen. I do understand the motifs behind this, and it would be a nice way to spy on hardcore criminals, but doesn't this fight against every moral standard there is? And would it be used only to serve our mutual benefit? The companies behind all the security programming would have to co-op and more holes would have to be made in the softwares.

Is this already possible elsewhere? Or is this a new trend on Big Brother-watch? I assume it has been going on for ages, but now it's about to get legalized...

Source: Helsingin Sanomat

I agree, but there really is no way to argue against it. If you want a right to privacy, you will be slandered with the accusation of being a criminal.

reply to post by OnWhiteMars

I totally agree with Mr. Hyppönen. I do understand the motifs behind this, and it would be a nice way to spy on hardcore criminals

It's comments like this from those that cry "Please Protect me from the bad people" that allow the NWO agenda to proceed.

If you are ok with encroaching on even a small percentage of the rights of a small minority of the population then it gives justification to enforce all on everyone. Don't you see this yet?

Peace

Originally posted by jude11
reply to post by OnWhiteMars

 

I totally agree with Mr. Hyppönen. I do understand the motifs behind this, and it would be a nice way to spy on hardcore criminals

It's comments like this from those that cry "Please Protect me from the bad people" that allow the NWO agenda to proceed.

If you are ok with encroaching on even a small percentage of the rights of a small minority of the population then it gives justification to enforce all on everyone. Don't you see this yet?

Peace

Yes, and then in ten years losers in the US will be pointing to some BS statistics or academic paper and claim we should be more like Finland.

The battle must be fought at every step to preserve our freedoms and rights.

reply to post by OnWhiteMars


The reason for increased monitoring is so we are used to it and effective means of monitoring are in place for when the speculative carbon market as planned in conjunction with Agenda 21 is a go.

Think about it, how else do they know if you run your lights too much time, have a cell phone on, a PC, your TV, the mileage of your car, how much heating you use for your home, ect. All things that reduce your allotted carbon points in a system of monitoring our production of carbon emissions by appliances, vehicles, everything, after which you have to pay a tax on your increased consumption.

That is the purpose for a population which accepts 100% of its activities monitored.

Have you ever seen the movie "in time" where the average person lives in a zone and is always working to get time allotted to his life and a global clock looms over their head at all times, or "hunger games" where everyone lives in strictly regulated zones where they can not even venture into the wilderness to hunt wild game let alone travel and visit other zones? The combination of the two is a close picture to what the future is intended to look like by the people behind this.

In both instances the super rich living in a technological and opulent wonder land.

Originally posted by jude11
reply to post by OnWhiteMars

 

I totally agree with Mr. Hyppönen. I do understand the motifs behind this, and it would be a nice way to spy on hardcore criminals

It's comments like this from those that cry "Please Protect me from the bad people" that allow the NWO agenda to proceed.

If you are ok with encroaching on even a small percentage of the rights of a small minority of the population then it gives justification to enforce all on everyone. Don't you see this yet?

Peace

To agree on understanding the motifs and to accept on the tools being used as such is two different things my friend. I know I'm not well versed in English, but...

Nevertheless, I do not have a problem on strict policies when it comes to handling a group of society which is focused on destroying and not building. Still I see this issue (as I stated in the first post) as disturbing and a step in a wrong direction.

Where are the principled politicians who will stand up to this type of facism and tell the bullies "Pack up and go!" No citizen wants to be spied upon, so to do so on a massive scale violates much more than human rights.

reply to post by OnWhiteMars


people readlly need to read the article - the key sentence is :

. Action always requires court authorization in the same way as, for example telephone tapping.

I'm gonna make a prediction and say that this will be shot down before 2014. It's not even feasible for finnish police. Even thought it would be limited to cases where they get a court order for the surveillance the same way they have to get one for phone tapping. They dont have the expertise or the man power to do this. Not to mention if they cannot get antivirus people to co-operate with them they won't have much of a change.

reply to post by PsykoOps


Let's hope so. But don't you think it is alarming to even consider a measure like this? Let alone to come public with it?

Yes it is alarming and a perfect example of politicians not understanding the modern world. They wouldn't have been able to keep this a secret anyway if they wanted to.

reply to post by AnIntellectualRedneck


When you run into statements like "if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear' or 'I have nothing to hide.' respond by saying ' that is only for so long as the goverments definition of 'done nothing wrong' or 'nothing to hide' continues to match yours and its the goverment who will decide if you have anyting to hide not you.