It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Buying some wine? Spy cameras will be watching

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 05:01 AM
link   

Buying some wine? Spy cameras will be watching


www.dailymail.co.uk

Big Brother CCTV cameras are to be fitted inside shops and supermarkets on the orders of the state to keep track on anybody buying alcohol.

A law is being quietly pushed through Parliament giving councils the power to order licensed premises to fit the surveillance cameras. Pubs will also be covered.

The footage of people innocently buying a bottle of wine in a shop or a pint of beer in a bar must be stored for at least 60 days, and be handed over to the police on demand.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 05:01 AM
link   
Wow, this just get's better and better....

Probably a directive from the EU (no source I'm afraid but a guess), we're now going down the path of monitoring people who buy alcohol or sit in a pub! We are truly the blueprint for the 'surveillance state'. Ridiculous.

Hmm, I wonder (a) how much this research and policy cost to come about and (b) how much it's going to cost to implement.

Don't worry though, we'll just throw it on the national-credit card and pay it back later.... Don't worry about the families and kids getting thrown on the street - it's far more important that we see who is buying beer.

Sigh.....time for a strong whisky....I mean coffee.....



www.dailymail.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 05:24 AM
link   
almost every shop and pub already has CCTV up the yinyang as it is, i don't see how this will cost the government anything.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 05:36 AM
link   
reply to post by pieman
 


Quite simple if you think about it...

(a) Most independents that have CCTV often have low-grade. The government will insist of high-grade to capture footage that is actually useful. Cost.
(b) Someone is not going to have to check, administer, enforce - that means creating lots, and lots, and lots, and lots, and lots, and lots of forms, paperwork etc. etc. to make it happen....that costs (mention the word government and council and add £££).

(c) Possibly at a later stage the linking of CCTV to a central hub. That's not going to happen now because people would not adhere to it, but get the infrastructure in then link it quietly in the future...hence, 'standardised' CCTV equipment will be required, rather than "Mr off-licence" popping into Maplins like they currently do.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 05:58 AM
link   
That is outragious to inform them that they have to have cctv in their businesses; even if the government would offer to pay for the added expense, which I doubt they will want to pay for the installation and equipment. Plus 60 days of film, that is outrageous.

When are the people in the UK going to say enough is enough? All of us Americans are with you UK people, we will stand beside you on this issues; even though we are across the oceans.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 07:35 AM
link   
I think it's going to be both telling and interesting as to where a lot of the prominent New Labour bods go when they leave government. I won't be surprised to see that a lot of them become 'advisors' or 'directors' to firms within industries that are propping up the roll out of a surveillance culture, whether it's CCTV, databases and so on.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 08:15 AM
link   
You know what works well on surveillance cameras?

Shotguns.



Oh, I forgot, you don't have those, do you?



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grumble
You know what works well on surveillance cameras?

Shotguns.


Oh, I forgot, you don't have those, do you?


Let me know when the good citizens of Chicago have shot out all their forthcoming CCTV cameras, will you? Doesn't have to be a shotgun though, any legal and constitutional firearm will do.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 09:57 AM
link   
No, we don't need them because we are all too happy to be surveyed, monitored etc. etc.

Average Joe has not got a clue.....

We did have a spate of people shooting or ramming into speeding cameras (or spray paint) but that soon went away.

Fickle. We're like a puppy and are happy to 'roll over'.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Saw this earlier and doing a quick search on the story led me to this site for the first time.

I guess there's like minded people residing here. Looking forward to having a good look round.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 10:10 AM
link   
I can't believe a whole page of posts has gone bye without a "if you have nothing to fear , you have nothing to hide" response. The standard reply from our "leaders" which has been adopted by the righteous . smug , I'm all right brigade . When will it end ?



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Oh don't feel bad, I have two cameras on me at work at all times and a microphone.

The only reason my boss has it? It's not to protect me in case someone decides to rob the place, it's to "correct" me when I do something that my boss wants done a little different.

It's agravating as all hell to be talking with a customer and have the phone ring. Boss on the other end telling me what I should do.

If for once the boss would use it to try and protect me when I have some irate and violent customer I wouldnt mind it so much. But the way he uses it is complete bs.

For longdog: if you have nothing to fear , you have nothing to hide



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 10:22 AM
link   
How long will it be before someone, or a lot of people (in government for eg.) decide that all that CCTV is just costing way too much money, and what the hell, just go ahead and chip everybody - to save everyone a lot of money!
By that time everyone will think that is just a great idea.
I think you have been trapped. Are you too far down that slippery slope to stop it? I hope not, but then again it sure looks like it. I just can't believe how far you have allowed it to go.
I for one, would strongly encourage some civil disobedience there and start with the spray painting of every single one of those ***** cameras!

You have got to stop it before the stupid politicians on this side of the pond start to follow suit.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by longdog
I can't believe a whole page of posts has gone bye without a "if you have nothing to fear , you have nothing to hide" response. The standard reply from our "leaders" which has been adopted by the righteous . smug , I'm all right brigade . When will it end ?


Funnily enough, I've seen less and less of that particular phrase over the last 12 months, definitely over the last 6 months.

I think perhaps the only good thing to have happened due to the current economic climate is that those who felt quite smug, safe and cosy about their place in society - and therefore had nothing to fear - are actually are uncertain and pessimistic about the world as the rest of us were before. They've seen how large institutions (government, industry, banking &c) who've claimed to be there to help us or protect us in some way are actually the swines so many of us have been saying along.

It only takes the threat of unemployment, repossession and long-term uncertainties to start hitting the white collar, middle-classes and then it's a case of 'what's happened to the world? It shouldn't be like this!'

Well, Concerned of Tunbridge Wells, welcome to the bloody club.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 10:34 AM
link   
I'm hoping it's because anyone reading on ATS understands the tripe of that sort of response from Government.

Most in here understand the civil-liberties being eroded and the hidden agendas in this type of 'we're protecting you' solution.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


Wow, that is not nice at all - it's not like you can walk out and get another job now either...



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 10:41 AM
link   
Mind you, remembering some of my previous posts on the influx of 'face detection' technology creeping into main-stream consumer devices (cameras etc.) and software (iPhoto, MS)....which then gets linked to social sites like FaceBook....

It won't be long before you walk somewhere and it's linked "there is John Smith who lives at XXXXX XXXX and works at XXXXXX" to whoever pays the most amount of money for the data. Take into account the furore that was caused with the updated facebook t&cs this week....it's their data, we're just populating it for them with all nice helpful, juicy information that they would not normally be privy too....

Who needs a chip.....we're already marked and the technology is rolling out to read it...

I'm getting carried away now.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Hey , Whatukno , hang loose , man . I've had a coupla beers ! Anyway if you look at it , it works both ways , mr pedantic . Cheers , mate ! Hic.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by koshka
 


Hi Koshka welcome to the site.

I think that this is ridiculous! If it is an EU law (which is more probable) we should campaign to get it booted out. I wish we could have a referendum to leave the EU.

Thats what annoys me about the British public (and im included so im just as bad) We know everything thats happening is just wrong but we just moan and get on with it.

The Americans might all have the wool pulled over their eyes but at least when the truth comes out to the public over there they all do somthing about it. We are all cowards and must be a laughing stock to the EU and the rest of the world.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 11:32 AM
link   
I'm with you there - the EU is bad news.

However, they knew what they were doing with the Lisbon Treaty which is a 'repackaged' EU constitution agreement ... which does not need a referendum. Crazy stuff.

I assume you have watched 'Remote Control' and 'Out of Control'?

www.ivc6.com...

www.ivc6.com...

The section where the chairman (if that's what he is called) rebukes our guy for challenging the accuracy of the voting because 'they have too much to get through that day' is just unbelievable....for those that have not watched it....

To save time, they resort to holding up hands to vote on the policies that get rolled out across the EU! This is because it is faster than having an electronic vote! WHAT! It's challenged (because it has been proved to be WRONG) and the chair holds up a stack of paperwork and says they have to get through 'all of this today', so we're doing it. In that case they may as well just agree to it all because that's all that is happening right now. Voting on policy is a joke, yet our country is being ruled in this way. For those that think our parliament run this country you're very much mistaken.





[edit on 21/2/09 by AlwaysQuestion]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join