The government is considering new legislation that would allow GCHQ, etc to mointor anyone's emails, internet usage and telephone calls. Do you think this is acceptable or not?

I think whether the UK has its own version of Patriot and Patriot2 will make not one jot of difference to the way the security services operate.

Not exactly answering the question there!

You didn't include an "it's an irrelevance" option.

But is it? Thin end of the wedge and all that.

Civil liberties always suffer in times of relative economic strife. Interesting timing, given the burgeoning form of democracy and protest by internet, etc.

I love the idea that a salaried, pensioned civil servant is sat logged onto a PC all day long anxiously awaiting me to text back "OK" to my youngest daughter after she's requested a call out from Dads Taxi to get her back home.

If they give me their name I'll even personalise my texts for them, something like "Did you get that Roger ?"

Quote ="McLaren_Field"I love the idea that a salaried, pensioned civil servant is sat logged onto a PC all day long anxiously awaiting me to text back "OK" to my youngest daughter after she's requested a call out from Dads Taxi to get her back home. If they give me their name I'll even personalise my texts for them, something like "Did you get that Roger ?"'" I love the idea that the Tories (rightly) opposed such ideas when in opposition – and have now done a complete about face, for no apparent new reason that has been declared. Anyway, how about us all starting now by ccing every email you post to david.cameron@number10.gov.uk?

Quote ="McLaren_Field"I love the idea that a salaried, pensioned civil servant is sat logged onto a PC all day long anxiously awaiting me to text back "OK" to my youngest daughter after she's requested a call out from Dads Taxi to get her back home. If they give me their name I'll even personalise my texts for them, something like "Did you get that Roger ?"'" I love the idea that the Tories (rightly) opposed such ideas when in opposition – and have now done a complete about face, for no apparent new reason that has been declared. Anyway, how about us all starting now by ccing every email you post to david.cameron@number10.gov.uk?

I dont want security thanks.

Which brings to mind Ben Franklin: "Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security."

So GCHQ just wants to do what Microsoft, apple, google etc are already doing to us without any legislation being passed or our permission requested.

Go for it. Bore yourselves to f*******g death.

Quote ="Mintball" Anyway, how about us all starting now by ccing every email you post to david.cameron@number10.gov.uk?'" That would be one hell of a protest campaign And of course they'll now know that it was you who suggested it ...

Quote ="Mintball" Anyway, how about us all starting now by ccing every email you post to david.cameron@number10.gov.uk?'" That would be one hell of a protest campaign And of course they'll now know that it was you who suggested it ...

Oh, I got the idea from some angry libertarian on Twitter. I'm just reporting it.

Some?

There's bloody thousands of them already. After all the strife of the last ten days, I reckon the very last thing Cameron wants is his very own Spartacus moment.

I'm up for it

I must admit, the idea tickles me pink.

So I think that's a 'me too'.

Difference is that "Microsoft, apple, google etc" can't arrest you for it.

Quote ="Mintball"I love the idea that the Tories (rightly) opposed such ideas when in opposition – and have now done a complete about face, for no apparent new reason that has been declared. Anyway, how about us all starting now by ccing every email you post to david.cameron@number10.gov.uk?'" TBF David Davis is agin it and he says he's a tory.

Quote ="Mintball"I love the idea that the Tories (rightly) opposed such ideas when in opposition – and have now done a complete about face, for no apparent new reason that has been declared. Anyway, how about us all starting now by ccing every email you post to david.cameron@number10.gov.uk?'" TBF David Davis is agin it and he says he's a tory.

Last time I looked 95% + of Daily Telegraph readers were against it too.

I'm on it too Minty, already posting it to Facebook....

[url=http://liberalconspiracy.org/2012/04/03/ten-facts-to-know-about-the-snooping-bill/Ten things you need to know about the proposed bill[/url

As ever, the only people who will lose out over this are people with something to hide.

I personally don't care if they have access to everything I do. If it saves one life, it's worth it IMO.

I'm sometimes pleased that my old man is no longer around. I dread to think what him and his mates would think of an imbecilic attitude like yours, after they'd spent 6 years fighting on three continents to oppose pervasive regimes. Then you come along and would happily sign away any hard-fought freedoms, in the name of the mythical war on terror.

I wondered how long before someone would emerge with the cretinous old 'if you've nothing to hide' excuse for an argument.

But at least this was only a trolling use of it ...

Cut out the middleman and just hand everything over to the local police, with a copy to GCHQ in Cheltenham and MI5 in London. Then you can relax and not worry about anything at all. Ever.

Why is it cretinous just because you don't agree with it? You are very predictable when it comes to politics, basically adopting an anti-Government approach to just about everything.

These powers do not mean they will be snooping on the average person's Facebook account or reading their emails. All it means is that they could, should they need to. There is a difference there.

Why do you object to it? If it gives them more power to deal with potential serious criminality, what is the downside?

Ignore Saddened. He's in one of his "I need to be noticed" moods.