Category Archives: Privacy

Should Christians submit to the census?

1 Peter 2:13-17

Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right. For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men. Act as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but use it as bondslaves of God. Honor all people, love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the king.

Government’s Criminal Surveillance Blunder

The Crimes Act 1961
Section 408 Act to bind the Crown
This Act shall bind the Crown.

In theory the Crown is subject to the Crimes Act – being a Crown representative acting for the Crown can not excuse anyone from being prosecuted under the Crimes Act.

The Crimes Act 1961
Section 216B Prohibition on use of interception devices
(1) Subject to subsections (2) to (5), every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years who intentionally intercepts any private communication by means of an interception device.

According to the law – whoever intercepted Kim Dotcom’s communications committed a crime. Whoever that was they should be prosecuted under the Crimes Act. It’s hard to imagine a greater breach of this section.

It’s already been admitted publicly that the interceptions were illegal (Although I see the preparation work being done to argue that no devices were involved so therefore it was not a breach of section 216B of the Crimes Act… From the Herald:- Spying on the group began on December 16 last year and ended on January 20 but did not involve installing devices).

The Police have all the information they need to start a criminal investigation and should start investigating shortly… I feel another Tui Billboard coming on. The Police are probably asking themselves “How long can we avoid this and how long is the statute of limitations for illegal interception?”

Trained circus seals

On Facebook, a libertarian friend posts

Sue Bradford complains:

“Bennett & English begin promoting next round of welfare changes – this time, it’s drug testing of beneficiaries. No thought appears to be given to lack of adequate A & D services, consequences to personal & family health & well being if you have no income, & downstream medical, police, court, prison & other costs. All aimed at appealing to beneficiary bashing vote, again, sadly.”

If you choose to take drugs, then get done when they stay in your system, any resulting consequences are of your own doing – so deal with them like a mature adult. It’s called taking personal responsibility. How hard is this to understand?

My response? Sue Bradford is right, for once. Here’s a post from my old blog that explains why.

[Reprised from beNZylpiperazine, August 2007. Five years later, National has picked up where Labour left off and nothing much has changed.]

What is it with right-wingers and their fetish for trained circus seals?

Popular among right-wingers is the following proposed solution to the problem of welfare abuse: make welfare beneficiaries jump through hoops. Exactly which hoops it’s thought welfare beneficiaries should jump through depends on the right-winger making the proposal. What particularly irks me is the suggestion put forward here.

Shouldn’t one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare cheque because I have to pass one to earn it for them??

Please understand – I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet.

I do on the other hand have a problem with helping someone sit on their arse drinking piss & smoking dope all day.

Surely, paying people to sit on their arses drinking piss and smoking dope all day is one of the better uses of government money. But I digress. There is an obvious problem with the proposal. If you make passing a urine test a condition of eligibility for the dole, this will have the unintended consequence of inducing people to apply for the sickness benefit as alcoholics or drug addicts, where failing a urine test is a condition of eligibility.

It’s all far too reminiscent of Jenny Shipley’s failed and embarrassing 1998 Code of Social and Family Responsibility. [PDF]

The truth is, there is only one solution to the problem of welfare abuse – remove the state entirely from the provision of welfare and devolve that responsibility to voluntary charities and private insurance companies – and only one political party advocating this solution – Libertarianz. Here are a couple of ideas which may (or may not) be part of the soon-to-be-announced Libertarianz transitional social welfare policy.

First, stop treating “alcoholism” and “drug addiction” as afflictions which qualify the afflicted for the sickness benefit. Drug addiction is a lifestyle choice, not a disease.

Second, put a six month time limit on the unemployment benefit. I don’t mean that beneficiaries should cease to receive the dole after they’ve been on it six months. I mean that all unemployment beneficiaries should cease to receive the dole six months after the policy is implemented. So, if the policy were to be implemented tomorrow, the unemployment benefit would be off the WINZ menu come February next year. Six months should be ample time to find a job. Perhaps some right-wingers might offer employment opportunities for professional trained circus seals.

Privacy = Information Sharing

Jesus said, “Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.”

Did you follow through? Good catch? Jesus wants to know how you’re doing.

Submit a follow-up report. Doesn’t have to be much. A picture says a thousand words.

Empty catch? Oh. Well, never mind. Here’s one from one that got away, atheist Mark Hubbard.

These National Socialists Love Their Doublespeak: Privacy = Information Sharing.

Another piece where I need say little other than shine the torch of liberty down the new tunnel being built to the Police State: http://www.stuff.co.nz/technol…

The new Privacy (Information Sharing) Bill.

Privacy = Information sharing. Just as in Orwell, war is peace, et al.

Right. Got it.

The article doesn’t State the SS officer in Wellington behind this one, but it smacks of Frau Collins, fresh from her victory of having destroyed one of the central planks of a free press: the right of a journalist to protect a source from the (largely incompetent) storm troopers at SFO: http://www.solopassion.com/nod…

Anyway, the new affront, and by now routine assault on our liberty under the brute fist of the Nanny State and her crony capitalists:

The Privacy (Information Sharing) Bill reduces the threshold under which information can be disclosed if there is a risk to public health and safety or threat to the life or health of an individual.

It also allows the sharing of personal information between agencies if done in accordance with approved information-sharing agreements.

So government departments can now share information about me, including with private sector cronies, on grounds of public health and safety. You don’t even need to have read Orwell, just watch the six o’clock news, to know there is nothing that can’t be justified somehow under the catch-all ‘public health and safety’.

As fast as the previous Labour Socialist Statists financially raped and plundered the productive with their envy taxes, these National Socialist Statists are destroying individual liberty at a similar breath-taking pace. This State we live in, behind the IRon Drape, is huge: there’s no where you can hide from it, and that’s just how they want it, sorry, you. That’s just how they want you, your life and bank accounts available to them at all times. And the sheeple go ‘bah bah, get Mark Hotchin, tax the rich pricks, redistribute, redistribute’.

Fools and simpleton dolts.

Thanks, Mark, for keeping the torch of liberty burning. (Aren’t you supposed to be on holiday?)