Judging by your second reply, you seem to be slowly acknowledging the accuracy of what I am saying.
As I said before, it doesn't really matter who I am. I respect your right to raise issues you believe are important to you. But I am entitled to do the same.
What matters is the issue and the strength of the argument on either side.
In one blog post you said you taped the converstation with Steve Roach because you were 'a journalist investigating a crime'.
The you said it was it was because it was for personal use.
It was either one or the other. You have changed your story.
You are right that we are all entitled to record personal calls. By personal, most people mean calls to their mum. Or husband. Or whoever. They don't mean calls which are then extensively written up all over Twitter, the blogs, and then in several newspapers.
It is true that you could have made notes of the conversation and perfectly legally written it up. But you didn't. You taped it. You may think the law on preventing taping of calls is silly. You may well be right in that view. But it happens to be the law.
I happen to think it is important. At the moment, the likes of Vodafone and Barclays don't routinely record all our calls - at least not without asking our permission. But if we allow people like you to do it then they soon will.
So it matters. The surveillance society is encroaching on all of us and we have to make a stand.
At the very least, you could admit you were wrong to tape the call with Steve Roach.
Incidentally, there is nothing abusive about calling you a right-wing public school man. You are a man (I'm happy to be corrected on this point - but it certainly appears that way). According to this website you went to Horris Hill prep school (current fees £7500 per term). And then to boarding school - not many of those in the state sector! As for right-wing, every article by you I can find is very right-wing. But hey, maybe you just write that kind of stuff for the Torygraph for the money.