Spot on, there is no freedom of speech in this grubby corrupt country. Dare say anything the state institutions don't like and you face criminal action. Here in the UK, a patient can be criminalised for raising a complaint about poor NHS standards of care; peaceful democratic protest will get you arrested and requests for independent investigations prohibited. Meanwhile, the NHS executive directors responsible for this deception, cover up and suppression are rewarded with 6 figure salaries, bonuses and promotion. Its open corruption:
Thanks. Here in Australia I have been watching this slide with much disquiet but it is so complex that I don't really understand what the implications are. Over the same period we have seen an Attorney General enable secret trials against whistleblowers who might embarass the government and even against the lawyer for one. Defamation law is also being used politically to shut people up.
Regarding reporting restrictions on the Letby case, what will be the situation on discussing this since the police are now investigating the CoCH for corporate manslaughter? As far as I am aware common law contempt is possible after an individual arrest, because a case is said to become ‘active’ at that point. But but in corporate manslaughter where no individual need ever be arrested and the crime leads to a fine. Is this a blurring of the two cases?
Back in 90s the NSA tried to backdoor every consumer device with a so-called "clipper chip" that would do private key encryption. This was seen as a way of preventing the emergence of public key cryptography as an open standard. It was illegal for a time to export the source code of PGP from teh US because of some Byzantine secrecy law. At one stage, a cypherpunk type printed the algorithm on a t-shirt and boarded a plane. These were the crypto wars back then. The folk story went that the hackers won. In reality the nascent silicon valley oligopoly probably had something to do with it. It's interesting to see the debate (sic) swinging back around to this particular red line for the tech companies. As long as there is strong end to end encryption like HTTPS the panopticon will be a little crappy and the Gutenberg printing press like effect of giving everyone a means to publish anything to everyone, in real time, now in motion for 25 years, but really only taking off in the last 10, will continue to have destabilizing effects on our uh.. democracy..
Spot on, there is no freedom of speech in this grubby corrupt country. Dare say anything the state institutions don't like and you face criminal action. Here in the UK, a patient can be criminalised for raising a complaint about poor NHS standards of care; peaceful democratic protest will get you arrested and requests for independent investigations prohibited. Meanwhile, the NHS executive directors responsible for this deception, cover up and suppression are rewarded with 6 figure salaries, bonuses and promotion. Its open corruption:
https://patientcomplaintdhcftdotcom.wordpress.com/
To pose the question is to answer it… it is all about curtailing our rights and freedoms!
Thanks. Here in Australia I have been watching this slide with much disquiet but it is so complex that I don't really understand what the implications are. Over the same period we have seen an Attorney General enable secret trials against whistleblowers who might embarass the government and even against the lawyer for one. Defamation law is also being used politically to shut people up.
Regarding reporting restrictions on the Letby case, what will be the situation on discussing this since the police are now investigating the CoCH for corporate manslaughter? As far as I am aware common law contempt is possible after an individual arrest, because a case is said to become ‘active’ at that point. But but in corporate manslaughter where no individual need ever be arrested and the crime leads to a fine. Is this a blurring of the two cases?
Back in 90s the NSA tried to backdoor every consumer device with a so-called "clipper chip" that would do private key encryption. This was seen as a way of preventing the emergence of public key cryptography as an open standard. It was illegal for a time to export the source code of PGP from teh US because of some Byzantine secrecy law. At one stage, a cypherpunk type printed the algorithm on a t-shirt and boarded a plane. These were the crypto wars back then. The folk story went that the hackers won. In reality the nascent silicon valley oligopoly probably had something to do with it. It's interesting to see the debate (sic) swinging back around to this particular red line for the tech companies. As long as there is strong end to end encryption like HTTPS the panopticon will be a little crappy and the Gutenberg printing press like effect of giving everyone a means to publish anything to everyone, in real time, now in motion for 25 years, but really only taking off in the last 10, will continue to have destabilizing effects on our uh.. democracy..