Interesting blog article on this:

We Should All Have Something To Hide
http://www.thoughtcrime.org/blog/we-...thing-to-hide/

You're linked to 'US surveillance program — Statement from Australian Privacy Commissioner' which IMO at least gives the impression that tyou are refering to Australians rights to privacy online. A warrant is not needed for Australian inteligence agencies or police to preserve internet commuinications-

http://www.minterellison.com/publica...update-201305/

However, for accessing stored internet commuinications, a warrant is needed-

http://www.minterellison.com/publica...update-201305/

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/c...482/s24aa.html

Exactly.

An excellent read. There are still more reasons for privacy, of course.

Demanding that anyone who thinks the way I do post up everythign about themselves on social media is what this thread is about. Just because he is sick of governments doesn't mean he can come here and boss the rest of us around. If you as a mod want things kept civil then why hasn't anyone said that the original post is out of line? We shoudn't need to report things like this mods look at these posts and I am surprised that has not been picked up.

I'm not linked to anything. I did however link to a page on the internet from an Australian Government source. That page then has another link that continues the first page on another page. It says what I quoted.

Once they have the information through surveilance they don't need a warrant for "stored internet communications". Why? because they already have it.

You've taken the extreme side with this. I never said the Constitution but I do mean the government! Never before have we had a PM or a government that has not listened at all to the people on any matter they have put forward. When the people vote in a certain person as PM (i.e. duly elected by the vast majority of the people) and another roles that person that is a problem. When that person calls an election and can't make up their mind who they are (remember the real Julia fiasco?) there is a problem. When that person goes to an election and says "There will be no ....... under a government I lead" and then breaks that promise within a month there is a probem. When 2 independants decide the fate of a nation and vote the exact opposite of what their electorates put as their 2nd choice there is a problem. Our PM (and the entire Labor party, Greens and Independants) knows what I think and so does my local member (one of the so called independants), why? because I have been in contact with them. If what I say or believe is "treason" I'd be in gaol already.

There is mass surveilance already and has been for years. It's a bit late to start crying foul now.

Your extreme solutions can be used against you.
No one has said they have absolute power, they have the responsibility to protect the people. The problem is when the crap hits the fan people say "why didn't they do more to stop this?" So the government tries the next obvious step and you get civil libertarians crying foul. So I ask you as a civil libertarian are you yourself willing to take the punishments you have suggested in the post I quote above if and when the crap hits the fan? It is either you as a citizen get out there and protect the nation or you let the government do it, there can be no other way!

So let us look at the initial post of this thread:Pure opinion/rant.
His conclusion to an easy solution, as I see it meant as provocation to make people think about their oppinion about that specific topic, but definitely not bossing anyone.
Elaborating what he means with "all your details" in the provocative question. I can't see any demand to actually do that, which is supported by the last sentences in the initial post:Asking the people he wanted to address for a re-evaluation of their opinions on this topic. Still not bossing anyone or demanding anything.

As you may have noticed, two mods have looked at this discussion, none of them found the initial post out of the line (although, as mentioned by unSpawn, this type of post rather belongs into a personal blog). I also can't see any violation of the LQ Rules by the OP. Otherwise we would have already acted as necessary.
Now let this thread go back on topic, if you want to discuss this any further feel free to contact me or any other mod of this forum.

Let us actually look at this in context.
An over generalisation designed to get people offside from the start.

No solution is ever easy and the fact he adds another post, going on about the death penalty for government representatives (is this not against LQ rules?), means this 1st post is not a conclusion rather it is a challenge.

Repeating oneself to make a point shows anger and a demanding attitude.
So you are saying when he says, he doesn't mean is that right? Each paragraph starts with an I and goes on with another I saying you or your. This is not a suggestion its a demand and the fact he is so forceful over 3 paragrpahs shows this.

An excuse to get away with his behaviour.

This is our contact Tobi. I have made my opinion known just like H_Tex has made his known. If he can say things like "people who worship ...." and that is an opinion instead of an insult then each and everyone of my statements is merely an opinion.

Back on topic.

There is a huge difference between deliberately posting your own personal information and governments using survelience. This topic is, in my opinion, ill conceived and poorly posted. Instead of being an emotional outburst going on and on about others, see the explanation above about langauge use, it would have been better to consider what he as an individual can do to protect his privacy.

Yes, easy solutions exist, like putting the OP on your ignore list, since he seems to bother you with his posts and this is not the first thread where this happens.

Taken out of context Tobi.

BTW I was put on his ignore list numerous times yet he still replies to me. I will continue to post where I want on any topic that interests me, regardless of who is the OP, refuting anything that I believe is wrong or extreme. I believe, yes it is my opinion, demanding by continuously repeating the same statements (see the analysis of his post above) of people one disagrees with is bad form. I also believe not answering valid questions when others answer his questions is bad form. Lastly, for this post, I believe recommending the death penalty for elected members of governments when the said person is not willing to provide any protections for a society he is a part of is extremely bad for and I am surprised that I am the only person who publicly states this. For someone who is worried about extremism the OP has shown in this thread that he is extreme.

I still can't see where H_TeXMeX_H demands anything, all I can see are thought experiments. Talking about bad form, your first replay to this thread (immediately throwing insults, which by the way are a rule violation and forced me to remember the participants in this thread to keep it civil) is not an example for good form either.

Maybe, but not a rule violation and in the worst case not more than simply annoying.

May be this is because you are the only person in this thread that doesn't get that this isn't a recommendation, but a thought experiment. Again, his sentence began with "How about ...", not "I demand ..." or "I recommend ...". It is in question form, not an imperative.

Anything can be here or in our blogs (deserving consequences and maby even rules (because they were born first and maybe don't call for evolution\r*\* yet)) but lol "points" 7,000,000,000 needing only K1-25 for all! And, I can stop txt'n that now cuz it's in my sig...

Sorry, but I didn't understand that at all.

TobiSGD+: "General"ly we don't(.)

When you repeat the same thing in the same post, even in the same sentence (e.g. go on, go on) it is not a thought experiment is is an emphatic demand. This is English language use. The first insult was thrown when the statement was made "and those who worship them". Just because he does not trust anyone in authority over him does not mean anyone else worships politicians. I never forced you to do anything. You did so because you wanted to, at no stage did I say Tobi go on, go on, do this.

I said it was poor form nothing about a rule violation in that.

Lol Tobi, the imperative comes with the go on go on and other repititions. English is a lovely language because it allows for use of differnt structures to do the same thing. H_Tex has done thsi quite well and I am sorry if you cannot see this but maybe it is because you like to think about thought experiments (you have a history of claiming thought experiments) and not about everything involved.

Anyway Tobi here is a question for everyone. If the government doesn't protect the citizens of the country you are in will you? Following on from H_Tex's other comment, if anyone in your country is hurt through you not providing protection would you accept H_Tex's punishment (death penalty)? These questions are not thought experiments they are just questions that I am interested in your answer so don't think about it because you should already know what you think.