IF we cannot body scan you
IF we cannot read your emails
IF we cannot read your medical records
IF we cannot detect your location
IF we cannot determine your political beliefs
then one day that will become
The terrorists win IF we cannot read your mind


Because if you're innocent why would you want to hide anything right? because data collection agencies, corporations and the government have done such a stellar job making sure that information is handled ethically and protected privacy in an adequate manner, right?

How is that load of bullshit working so far? -when will draconian security measure applied without cause or reason be seen for what they are?

There is always be those that use violence to influence, no amount of snooping and big brother shit will ever change that.

While your examples are obviously extreme to illustrate a point one can lobby peacefully. If you cannot wear your favourite religious clothing item to go to school then go to a different school.

Better yet, lobby to change the law.

Dictatorships and oppressive regimes aside, France is not comparable to WWII Germany or the nazis. That's a step too far.

The beauty of democracy and why it's so much better despite it's numerous flaws is that everyone has a voice. Where is my voice under religious rule?

You wish to protest your right to practice religion? do so!

If god was really so offended he'd come down from heaven and smite us. Please leave the smiting to him lest you take up his roll in the name of what you can accept.

Said in context it meant that if religion conflicts with the law the law takes precedent.

Should the entire country become religious and wish to live different they can vote to change the law. Hope that clears that up.

Why not write-up an easy to understand guide online & send them links instead?

Yeah but you spelled it wrong! /scarasm

Why have religions of various kinds have been mostly declining over the years and why some Christians shun the church!

France is a law abiding country. The law is above religion. The law protects freedom of expression as a fundamental right.

There is not fundamental right of "respect". If you are offended that's too bad, perhaps it was wrong of the other person to offend you. At the same time being dishonoured or disrespected at no point allows anyone to take action in the form of violence.

Why are my beliefs not protected in religious countries? -because they differ and thus deemed wrong. Religion has no tolerance in a modern world. Perhaps 2000 years ago it was thought of as peaceful but not today, it is outdated and no longer needed.

All these religious outrages cause is to show how they have no place in society and that people should abandon thousands of years of fairy tales for reason and acting reasonably.

If you do not like what is written somewhere, don't read it. If you don;t like what's on a TV show do not watch it. No one is forcing you to be "offended".

Richard Hawking was so right when he questioned why must we "respect" religion. Does religions enshrine respect for my beliefs?

Even smart people can believe stupid things and believing violence is a correct or even expected response to being offended is stupid indeed.

Dear pope; how many times should one turn the other cheek? -Then Peter came and said to Him, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?" 22: Jesus said to him, "I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven..

Religious people are not pious or better morally, they are flawed and dumb like everyone else, biased towards their own beliefs and cherry pick what works for them when they want to anyways so all this talk of peaceful religions is nonsense.

There are actually a few other things that help terrorists;

Mobile phones, telephones, radio waves, email, speech, pens, paper, smoke signals...actually who is this idiot?

Instead of arresting social media site owners, forums users and people with "illegal thoughts"; let's arrest all the senior officials that new the GCHQ are spying on their own via the NSA and arrest senior NSA officials for knowingly spying on their own via the GCHQ.

You cannot talk to these people because they are "at war" like so many radical groups against different ideas.

When all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail.

Ever had the feeling something just went past you so fast as to leave you confused as to what it was exactly?!

Can we first then agree one what exactly constitutes a troll?

I've seen a lot of news about trolls and trolling but it seems that it's rather loosely on an almost arbitrary basis. "Troll" has been used to described a stalker, an asshole, a person with an impolite opinion, a racist, sexist, bigot etc etc

From one online dictionary we can learn that "troll" (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/troll?s=t) has nothing to do with online activity. Seems this word is now re purposed to what the urban dictionary has an entrie for: (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=troll)

"One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument."

Now by that definition which seems to be very much the case in many references is such a person deserving of punishment? prison? -our norms are dynamic. With enough trolls trolling will be the norm.

The article mentions human behaviour and I believe trolling is an aspect of bullying which is very much natural (although incorrect) and normal. I say this because it's a complete fallacy to tie "trolling" with stalking or sexual harassment.

We need some clarity on this rather than all this blanket FUD nonsense about trolling. When a person gets mouthy in real life he might get locked up for 24 hours for "disturbing the peace". This includes some pretty colourful language. If this is consistent against one specific person then that is harassment, there is a legal framework for this.

Has harassment stopped? bullying? -while not justifying it, I argue it never will cease because it's part of human nature.

Our only hope is to create a finer definition to stop this umbrella term which means different things to different people at different times without consistency; and furthermore we need a punishment befitting of the offence if there indeed was one at all.

As usual, creative people will find solutions to make the spying irrelevant.

From decentralizing and conception to storing data where the US (and others) cannot legally reach it etc.

The US and other agencies dug themselves a hole. They have shown us they are weary of strong encryption standards and good security practices by individuals.

They've shown us that we cannot trust them to use data responsibly and that we should avoid sharing anything with them.

Then apparently it's a chemical in hops with such low dosage that thousands of beers need to be drunk for the dosage to be meaningful...

What about the other compounds found in beer that would kill a person drinking such quantities?

Talk about baiting headlines...

In order for this research to be of any use we need peer reviews as well.

Can they please go into some detail as to the methodology used to connect to Silk Road 2.0, how they purchased things anonymously and how to tell teh real thing from fakes?

Also, if they have any idea of how to hide a kilo of say uhm, feathers from the authorities in terms of shipment, delivery and pickup that would be great for uhm, scientific purposes.

Rejoice my brethren; finally linux is becoming popular, the year of the desktop is upon us!

The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.

...and; People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

More to the point is that of course, all these disproportionate and draconian measures have ensured no whistle-blowing takes place. Good job, pat yourselves on the back and suck each other's cocks.

-nuff said

Holy screwballs, we're ALREADY monitoring everything everywhere without telling anyone about secret courts with secret decisions?!

Quick, let's legislate after the fact to make it all legal!