[Livia]

Looks like everyone's okay with these documents being "leaked". I mean, it fits in with a lot of people's agendas, doesn't it. David Cameron's Dad... how fortunate.

Anyone interested in who it was who leaked these documents? I mean, there is a whole other thread about Apple refusing to allow the Security Services to access a terrorist's phone because it'll apparently threaten "personal privacy"... but there's an awful lot of support... and a certain amount of glee... that some nameless, faceless organisation has unlawfully accessed what are essentially private files because it shames people you don't like.

You can't have it both ways... no access for the security services but full acceptance of some spotty hacker because he reinforces your own agenda.

[bots]

Originally Posted by Livia

Looks like everyone's okay with these documents being "leaked". I mean, it fits in with a lot of people's agendas, doesn't it. David Cameron's Dad... how fortunate.

Anyone interested in who it was who leaked these documents? I mean, there is a whole other thread about Apple refusing to allow the Security Services to access a terrorist's phone because it'll apparently threaten "personal privacy"... but there's an awful lot of support... and a certain amount of glee... that some nameless, faceless organisation has unlawfully accessed what are essentially private files because it shames people you don't like.

You can't have it both ways... no access for the security services but full acceptance of some spotty hacker because he reinforces your own agenda.

Personally, i always protect peoples right to privacy. However, if someone breaches that and the information enters the public domain, then there is no going back, and if wrong doing has been committed, then it should be acted upon.

If it was a whistleblower/hacker, if they broke the law publishing it, they should be prosecuted. Simple really.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

Looks like everyone's okay with these documents being "leaked". I mean, it fits in with a lot of people's agendas, doesn't it. David Cameron's Dad... how fortunate.

Anyone interested in who it was who leaked these documents? I mean, there is a whole other thread about Apple refusing to allow the Security Services to access a terrorist's phone because it'll apparently threaten "personal privacy"... but there's an awful lot of support... and a certain amount of glee... that some nameless, faceless organisation has unlawfully accessed what are essentially private files because it shames people you don't like.

You can't have it both ways... no access for the security services but full acceptance of some spotty hacker because he reinforces your own agenda.

We can argue how morally indefensible it is for illegal behaviour to out corruption at the highest level, how that is comparable to security services asking for access to data I don't know... In the end they hacked it anyway so there really is no high ground to be had is there?
There is also no 'glee' in knowing this information, nor does it affect anyone I don't like, personally I don't know anyone affected here.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Livia

Looks like everyone's okay with these documents being "leaked". I mean, it fits in with a lot of people's agendas, doesn't it. David Cameron's Dad... how fortunate.

Anyone interested in who it was who leaked these documents? I mean, there is a whole other thread about Apple refusing to allow the Security Services to access a terrorist's phone because it'll apparently threaten "personal privacy"... but there's an awful lot of support... and a certain amount of glee... that some nameless, faceless organisation has unlawfully accessed what are essentially private files because it shames people you don't like.

You can't have it both ways... no access for the security services but full acceptance of some spotty hacker because he reinforces your own agenda.

What you have to understand Livia - as difficult as that may be for anyone with logic - is that this contradiction within some peoples views of 'Neighing' to the Security Services having access to terrorists phones because of 'privacy protection', and the 'Yeighing' to this invasion of privacy in the case of these so-called 'Panama Papers', is nothing unusual.

These are the same people who for years on here, have called David Cameron and some of his closest cronies, every bad name in the book - from 'Evil', 'Dishonest' and 'Corrupt', to 'Uncaring' and 'Heartless' - UNTIL it comes to Cameron and his closest cronies stance on remaining in the EU, which just happens to coincide with their own viewpoint, and then they READILY accept EVERY one of Cameron's claims about the benefits of EU membership, and their hatred of him has visibly shifted to notable EU 'OUT' campaigners Boris Johnson and Michael Gove.

Add to the above, the fact that these same people weep and wail about the impoverished state of the N.H.S., Schools and other services, and the lack of homes, whilst at the same time protesting against any type of immigration control, and there is no wonder we are confused - or should that be THEY are confused?

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

What you have to understand Livia - as difficult as that may be for anyone with logic - is that this contradiction within some peoples views of 'Neighing' to the Security Services having access to terrorists phones because of 'privacy protection', and the 'Yeighing' to this invasion of privacy in the case of these so-called 'Panama Papers', is nothing unusual.

These are the same people who for years on here, have called David Cameron and some of his closest cronies, every bad name in the book - from 'Evil', 'Dishonest' and 'Corrupt', to 'Uncaring' and 'Heartless' - UNTIL it comes to Cameron and his closest cronies stance on remaining in the EU, which just happens to coincide with their own viewpoint, and then they READILY accept EVERY one of Cameron's claims about the benefits of EU membership, and their hatred of him has visibly shifted to notable EU 'OUT' campaigners Boris Johnson and Michael Gove.

Add to the above, the fact that these same people weep and wail about the impoverished state of the N.H.S., Schools and other services, and the lack of homes, whilst at the same time protesting against any type of immigration control, and there is no wonder we are confused - or should that be THEY are confused?

Well I for one am voting for out of the EU or did you miss me saying that?!
If you have more patronising assumptions to make, send them to my secretary.

[kirklancaster]

QUOTE=DemolitionRed;8597200]Well I for one am voting for out of the EU or did you miss me saying that?!
If you have more patronising assumptions to make, send them to my secretary.[/QUOTE]

Ha ha - Methinks that you think FAR too much of yourself dear and overestimate your importance in these debates. I was neither addressing you, nor referring to you, so save the thinly veiled perjorative comments, you may need them.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

QUOTE=DemolitionRed;8597200]Well I for one am voting for out of the EU or did you miss me saying that?!
If you have more patronising assumptions to make, send them to my secretary.

Ha ha - Methinks that you think FAR too much of yourself dear and overestimate your importance in these debates. I was neither addressing you, nor referring to you, so save the thinly veiled perjorative comments, you may need them.[/QUOTE]

I could say the same to you, Comments relating to 'them' are as ambiguous as the 'some people' reference. Maybe state who you are addressing to take the guesswork out of forming a response to your posts.

[Ninastar]

Originally Posted by Livia

Looks like everyone's okay with these documents being "leaked". I mean, it fits in with a lot of people's agendas, doesn't it. David Cameron's Dad... how fortunate.

Anyone interested in who it was who leaked these documents? I mean, there is a whole other thread about Apple refusing to allow the Security Services to access a terrorist's phone because it'll apparently threaten "personal privacy"... but there's an awful lot of support... and a certain amount of glee... that some nameless, faceless organisation has unlawfully accessed what are essentially private files because it shames people you don't like.

You can't have it both ways... no access for the security services but full acceptance of some spotty hacker because he reinforces your own agenda.

Brilliantly well said.