France's Israeli PM cracks down on rights

Discussion in 'Politics' started by TorontoTrader2, Sep 8, 2008.

  1. While you guys are looking for a arabic bogeyman behind every corner. Israeli's continue the march against our rights and freedoms.

    When will you get it?


    French revolt over Edvige: Nicolas Sarkozy’s Big Brother spy computer

    UponCharles Bremner
    London Times
    Monday, Sept 8, 2008

    President Nicolas Sarkozy faced an embarrassing split in his Cabinet today over a computer system that a new French internal intelligence service will use to spy on the private lives of millions of law-abiding citizens.

    Hervé Morin, the Defence Minister, broke government ranks to side with a growing revolt against Edvige, an acronym for a police database that will store personal details including opinions, the social circle and even sexual preferences of more or less anyone who interests the State.

    Edvige, which is also a woman’s name, was created by decree in July to store data on anyone aged 13 or above who is “likely to breach public order”.

    “Sarkozy’s Big Sister”, as it has been dubbed, will also track anyone active in politics or trade unions and in a significant role in business, the media, entertainment or social or religious institutions. Listed people will have limited rights to consult their files.

    “Surely this is a strange mixing up of categories,” said Mr Morin, who was a senior centrist party MP until he joined the Cabinet of Mr Sarkozy last year.

    “Is it useful to gather data such as telephone numbers, sexual orientation and details of taxes and assets and so on without knowing exactly what is the point?” he asked.

    Mr Morin was slapped down by Michèle Alliot-Marie, the Interior Minister, who heads Mr Sarkozy’s drive to implement the law-and-order pledges of his 2007 election campaign. “It is odd that Mr Morin has not managed to find my telephone number,” she said. “I would have set his mind at rest.”
  2. Interesting stuff...
    Looks like the article was fleshed in even more.

    This is a typical abuse and corruption of information-democracy.

    The answer is to redesign information-society so that there is identification-privacy...
    I.e you cannot get a single consistent ID on someone. The parallel would be that we did not have consistent user IDs on EliteTrader, but rather temporary and shifting IDs. This is again about trust-modelling and systems design. There must be a democratic system so that the participants can trust their privacy and security, as to interact with the information society - share and access contributions.

    The problem in trust-deficiency is not the single opinion, but the accumulation of positive identifications and profile build-up.
  3. You frequently make interesting points. You're one of the few people here who I often disagree with yet still respect intellectually. You're also well mannered.

    I'd like to make a non-techie counter point. While I too as a libertarian of sorts bemoan the rapid disintegration of not just privacy but of rights, there's a peculiar anonymity inherent to electronic rather than personal interaction. Generations before police just infiltrated the plotting mob. Todays plotters of anarchy are terrorists text messaging via pirated accounts and wiring money through off shore LLC.'s. The 9/11 conspirators were the first virtual terrorists. Forget the coolness of trading from a boat-there are guys who can hijack airliners with a Blackberry in Waziristan So in a sense the FBI listening in on a 1950's union meeting is really only the moral equivalent of the sophisticated surveillance methods used today.
    Of course as we know Europe has led the West in the erosion of fundamental rights of expression. I'm far less concerned about criminal prosecutions developed through surveillance than the fear of continued bans on free speech and ideas.
  4. Pabst,

    the question is far more complex - and when it before was just simply eavesdropping or breach of privacy for the most simplistic communication forms that we have enjoyed as humans almost "forever" - today it is far more all-encompassing.

    With the advent of digital communications, we perform everything from bank transactions, voice communications, voting in elections or organizations, photo albums, journals of our lives, professional work, health records, travel itineraries and just about everything you can imagine...

    When you cannot enjoy privacy in a digital society - you have essentially no privacy in a modern country.

    There is also another essential issue - the very central matter of your personal information that you digest and react to every day. This is the most important interaction that you perform in a free democracy.

    If you cannot trust the information given to you - how can you trust that your decisions are in fact sound and ultimately in your best interests?

    This affects your privacy, security, future and social structures like society. Today the "authorities" are not so much concerned about each separate incident of surveillance - they see the synergistic effects of the whole system.

    I have been touting "systems science" and working with modelling non-linear regression analysis for parts of my career. I also was a communications operator for NATO communication while in the military. My interests lie in the philosophies and structural properties of systems - society, personal life, sciences etc.

    You can no longer look at things as "directly related" because society has now evolved to a level where it is the accumulation of effects that are the most forceful ones. This goes for disseminating information to the population, geopolitical strategy, military, politics, economy, security and many other areas.

    The notion of free markets itself is just a system which seemingly should be working perfectly, but because it interacts with a mixed economy with social implications, there are strong regulations and influences which exploit deficiencies in this interaction. That is why the trust-model must be improved to ensure efficient and fairly balanced free markets, without a structure of funnelling to those taking advantage of the systemic problems. Further encumbering systems with more legislation just fuels other systemic problems and obfuscates the system so that ultimately the trust is eroded.

    E.g US government explicitly addresses systemic issues in it's influencing of society - synergies and accumulated effects are central.

    It is about complex adaptive systems, and how these are being influenced. I am not saying that people are mindless pawns in society, but there is more to social structures than most people are aware of. Only when you start pondering about more than your direct contact with people, organizations and society do you start to realize the "science" inherent in "systems". Education is important for progress and human evolution, and to be able to progress efficiently you need factual information that you can trust. That trust is very thin in today's democracies - because it is corruptible. Therefore I think it's in the best interest of everyone to redesign the current trust-model and make it stronger, more robust and adaptive by placing it under "democratic control" with an open system that contains traceability, transparency, privacy and fair balancing.

    Also, an example of how the US have been working covertly in influencing Europe for decades has been recently discovered (since around 2000)...

    The US has not changed as much as Europe has changed since the end of the cold war. Things have just shifted slightly ...

    See my posts


    Fear has been the most important instrument in dealing with social control since the dawn of ages.
    Factual information that can be trusted is the antidote - ensuring balance and individual respect.

    It might seem a little "crackpot" when talking about these systemic deficiencies - because it seems like I am talking about "conspiracy theories". Well, it's not a conspiracy - it's just deficiencies that are open to influence in systems like democracy, news organizations, information society etc.

    Where there are deficiencies - something will appear to exploit them and use this "edge" for it's growth and existence.

    When we are dependent on trusting these systems for living in a democracy, it is obvious that these systemic deficiencies are eroding this trust - ergo cue the rampant "conspiracy theories".

    My messages have been about pointing out these systemic deficiencies - which sometimes lend themselves to possibilities of corruption, deceit, fraud, loss of privacy, encumbering democratic efficiency, reducing fairness - in effect censorship of democratic rights that we naively take for granted.

    We are evolving as humans, and our social systems are evolving even faster with the help of technology. Some conservative forces of society are resisting this change into more fair and balanced systems - because they thrive on the current deficiencies.

    On a larger scale - any structure - a system, entity or phenomenon struggle for their position, growth and preserving integrity. That is essentially "life" or existence itself. However, for there to be sustainable growth and a stable future - balance must be sought with the environment, other structures. This goes for nature, markets, social systems, any personal relationship - on any level.

    Balance in personal relationships is "respect".

    That is the interdisciplinary nature of "systems science".