Being Built For Your Children... A Total Information Control Grid Prison...

Submitted by SadInAmerica on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 2:28pm.

You would think that in this ‘age of austerity’ that schools would find better things to spend money on than CCTV cameras, such as books or how about extra teaching staff to cope with the grossly overcrowded classrooms?

But not so for Stoke Park School in Coventry, where depending on which tabloid scandal sheet you choose to pay any attention to, personally I wouldn’t, this ranges from £10,000 – £50,000 for the installation of 112 cameras both in and outside the school. The Daily Mirror and The Star go with the £10,000 figure whilst The Express, The Sun and the free Metro paper available on trains and buses, also full to the brim with CCTV cameras incidentally, go with the higher £50,000 figure. The ‘newspapers’ in which this story is printed do have one thing in common. They are all tabloids.

That possibly should tell you that this phenomenon is strictly for the ordinary schools and perhaps not in the rather more salubrious private schools where I’m sure the presence of CCTV may not be tolerated quite so readily.

They vary very little in their opinion however in their general editorial take on children being spied upon in school.

The Sun for example quotes a parent, Dan Austin, as stating that “It’s ridiculous. It’s like sending your kids to a high security prison.”

The same quote appears in every tabloid with The Express adding from the same parent apparently “I don’t like the idea that children are being monitored so closely – it instils a dangerous lesson that no one is trustworthy.”

It’s not just parents who seem to be critical of the school spying on their children. Teachers are also asked their opinion although it’s interesting to note that no CCTV had been installed in the teacher’s staff room.

One is quoted as saying that teachers are “privately angry”. Another teacher states that “The school has suffered from graffiti, anti-social behaviour and thefts but I do not think this is the way to go to solving the issue.” Whilst another said that, “You can’t walk anywhere without being watched.” Perhaps she doesn’t use the teacher staffroom. Of course, none of these teachers are named and so there is no way of verifying if these statements were ever made or whether they’re just a weak attempt by the tabloids to imply that there is strong resistance to such surveillance of our children.

Ironically it appears that the main area of contention for teachers in relation to CCTV cameras, apart from not wanting them in their staffroom, appears to be that there are no cameras ‘evident’ in the classrooms, the very place where teachers experience problems.

The use of the word ‘evident’ is interesting in itself. Does it imply that there are indeed hidden cameras in the classrooms? Perhaps this accounts in the discrepancy of £40,000 in installation costs?

Of course the heads of the school, in the shape of Acting Head Teacher, Marie Harrison who was only too happy to be named, had to justify the expense and as usual in this kind of case, the age old mantra, used by tyrants throughout history was trotted out when she stated that “CCTV was for ensuring children's safety and minimizing damage”.

Perhaps next time they’ll use that other justification well marketed by government that ‘if you’ve nothing to hide then you’ve nothing to fear’.

However, there’s more to this story when we consider other forms of technology being used in schools which use surveillance techniques to ‘keep pupils safe’ or control their movements and activities in schools.

Here’s an article from last year extolling the virtues of facial recognition cameras in schools

And another about fingerprinting our children in schools:

Cameras and fingerprinting are now commonplace within schools. Here’s another recent report regarding the power of search into pupil’s private belongings by teaching staff:

And yet another regarding the search and confiscation of mobile phones which are private property:

The following quote is taken from the above report.

“Under the proposed changes, heads will be able to search for telephones, as well as alcohol, drugs, weapons, pornography, stolen goods and other items banned by their school.”

Don’t think for a minute that if teachers or head teachers have the power to search pupils for any of the above that they won’t go through their other belongings. How else are they to conduct a thorough search?

All these measures cited above are simply measures of control being instilled in the minds of our children to ensure that when they grow to be adults, they will be accustomed to this gross invasion of their privacy and so will not balk when stopped on the street by a ‘law enforcer’, facially scanned, fingerprinted, x-rayed and bodily searched in the full glare of anyone who cares to look.

But I doubt if anyone will pay the slightest bit of attention. Privacy and the rights of the individual have been given up, as the powers that be will tell you, ‘for the greater good’. This is simply collective punishment for the masses whilst those in power do not adhere to such restrictions on their liberties when the law apparently applies to them equally.

Ok for us to get cancer, not so elected officials it seems.

This ‘legal’ exemption for those who supposedly work for us here in the UK and Ireland was exposed recently in the so called ‘expenses scandal’ which pointed out what every dog on the street already knew, that MPs were stealing money from the public in vast amounts, yet, despite all of those exposed in this eternal racket, only a few scapegoats have been sacrificed on the altar of public wrath.

But getting back to CCTV cameras; back in 2009 there were apparently 10,000 allocated crime fighting CCTV cameras in London alone, at a cost to the public of £200 million, yet 80% of crime still goes unsolved. This begs the question, if the CCTV cameras are so inefficient that 80% of crime goes unsolved, then why are the government spending vast amounts of your money on a technology which has been statistically proven to have failed?

It doesn’t take a genius to work out that there must be another reason.

As mentioned above, children have been conditioned at school to accept cameras, using facial recognition technology which stores your child’s image, along with their fingerprints, on a database where the contents could be used by those in power to track and trace your child wherever they go, not only in the school but anywhere in the country and indeed abroad.

They are being conditioned to accept intrusive technologies so that it becomes the norm in their generation’s society whereby they will never question the right of anyone in authority access to their personal property, space or even their body.

If parents and teachers in Stoke Park School in Coventry are so concerned that CCTV is a gross violation of their child’s privacy and human rights, then they should refuse, en masse, to send their children to these establishments. The parents in particular should challenge the teachers, who refuse to have CCTV in their staffroom using the old catchphrase mentioned above ‘if you’ve nothing to hide then you’ve nothing to fear’.

If it’s good enough to permit constant surveillance of your children then it’s good enough for the teachers and other staff. If it’s not good enough for them then it’s not good enough for anyone in the school.

That goes for CCTV cameras on the street. Trying taking a video camera around London and see what reaction you get from police enforcers. They don’t want you filming any tourist sites and they certainly don’t want you filming them. They’re special don’t you know, but don’t they work for us?

Again, if CCTV is good enough for the public, then me filming a police enforcer in my employ, for his or her own safety of course shouldn’t be a problem either.

Seems taking pictures of your own children is also against the law now too.

But let’s not get paranoid. Having your face scanned, your fingerprints taken, DNA swabs taken, your body x-rayed with cancer inducing radiation, not only at the airports but also on the street or anywhere is fine isn’t it?

And I thought terrorists weren’t supposed to change our lives. Well guess what folks, you’re the new terrorist and your lives HAVE changed.

The government are just letting you know, in a twist on the call to sanity in the movie ‘Network’;

They’re (stark raving) mad as hell and they’re not going to take it (from you) anymore!


Neil - February 10, 2011 - SovereignIndependent

Tag this page!
Submitted by SadInAmerica on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 2:28pm.