SecretSoftware wrote:

There are very specific situations where the law has to win. But in Law we have something called:

A person cannot testify or be compelled to testify against themselves. (that is why you have the right to remain silent, when you are being arrested).


Please stop assuming US legal process applies to the rest of the world. I realise your president believes this; I had rather hoped 9ers would be far more aware.
SecretSoftware wrote:


dahat wrote:


SecretSoftware wrote:
But these laws are fundamentally illegal, because they break the law of privacy that exists in most democratic constitutions.


Psst... the UK is not a democracy (nor is the US, but that's another post), they are a constitutional monarchy and their constitution is quite lacking with regards to enumerated limits of governmental power the way the US's is... as such there is less of a ‘right to privacy' there than there is here. Know why? They don't have a codified written constitution!



If the UK is not a democracy then what is it doing over in IRAQ? are you saying that MR Blair is trying to give the IRAQI people something that his own country does not already enjoy?


Learn more about politics. The UK is a monarchy still, that's how our system works. Admittedly if the monarch ever tried to exercise power there would be a consitutional crisis, but in theory it's possible. (Pre-emption : Eagle, SHUT UP)

Oh and "these laws are fundamentally illegal"; a law by definition cannot be illegal unless it is struck down under overriding rules.

SecretSoftware wrote:
 
If the US is not a democracy then what is the US exactly? A fascist republic?


The US is a republic. Even I know that.


SecretSoftware wrote:

LOL. Absence of evidence is not evidence of guilt. The onus of proof is on the prosecutes to show beyond a shadow of a doubt that evidence exists and it points in such and such direction.


Actually in the UK system, under certain circumstances, silence can be taken into account in trails. The terrorism laws allow this for example

SecretSoftware wrote:

So , intimidating the public, will not work. Remember the public elect the leaders, and the leaders work as the public pleases.


Not true; not even in the US. There is no easy or immediate recall procedure. For all intents and purposes once a representative is elected it's very hard to get them out before their term ends; democracy ends at the ballot box and what happens inbetween elections is not true democracy; the public can only attempt to influence, but cannot directly vote on everything before the representative elective bodies. And the US has even bigger problems with corporate lobbying.


SecretSoftware wrote:

Meanwhile, Encryption is the technology by which we maintain our right to privacy, and no one, I mean no one, can take that away.

What should remain a secret, should remain just like that. The founding fathers made that point clear in the document entitled "The Constitution of the United States of America".


Again stop quoting US law when talking about the UK process. Indeed there are exceptions to the US right to privacy; witness the rash of Freedom of Information procedures.

SecretSoftware wrote:

Now you can sing and dance to bend or redefine the laws as written, but that will not eat with the people of this republic.


And yet you don't complain about search warrents, FOI processes, the publication of sex offenders lists via Megan's law, etc.


SecretSoftware wrote:

Does that make you a terrorist supporting 9ner? I think yes.


Ad hominem attacks? Are you really that desperate?