Watching you legislation

[cjp]

Here we go again.​

First the heightened security warning.
Then the extra government powers

All for our own good of course.

Ministers are poised to pass emergency laws to require phone companies to log records of phone calls, texts and internet usage, but Labour and Liberal Democrats are warning that they will not allow any new law to become a backdoor route to reinstating a wider "snooper's charter".
A Liberal Democrat source said Nick Clegg was open-minded about some form of replacement for the data directive but stressed: "There is no question of a snooper's charter, watered down or otherwise, being introduced by this government."
Inter-party talks, likely to bear fruit this week, are being held against the backdrop of an increased terrorist threat posed by British Muslims being radicalised by travelling to fight in Syria, and by the continuing controversy over the revelations by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

Any new "snooper's charter" bill would require a vast extension of the communications data that the phone and internet companies are currently required to retain. It would mean the retention of all data tracking everyone's use of the internet and mobile phones, including every web page visited, and not just the bare details kept for billing purposes by the companies.

http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/jul/06/track-phone-usage-law-snoopers-charter

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-28182494

There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate, they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live—did live, from habit that became instinct—in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.
George Orwell 1984

More people are killed on UK roads each year then in Terrorist attacks yet cars capable of exceeding the National Speed Limit are still permitted to be sold.
Cigarettes are still sold.
Too much alcohol is sold.
But on the hint of something BAD happening our few remaining private moments are going to be no longer private, to be tracked to be judged.

What makes you think the trackers will be any more moral than Andrew Coulson who has just been locked up for this sort of thing?

Priorities all seem wrong.
Greedy power crazed politicians and their paymasters
It makes me cross.

 

[meridian2]

Because the trackers aren't working for the media. Coulson got off lightly because otherwise they would've been screamed at for trying to shackle the 'freedom of the press'.
A freedom, we all know, each media outlet take liberties on.

 

[DarloRich]

But on the hint of something BAD happening our few remaining private moments are going to be no longer private, to be tracked to be judged.

Would it worry you more to know that this is already happening? Various government agencies can, today, very easily and very quickly "audit" your entire life and judge you?

 

[fowler9]

Anyone would think we are being offed in massive numbers by some terrorist threat. Like any terrorist is going to google how to make bombs and then call their mates on O2 to sort out an attack. If the government takes away everyones freedom in the name of keeping us all free then the terrorists don't really have to do anything.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Pfft, if you've got nothing to hide you've got nothing to fear.

I think the Stasi said that too.

 

[Johnuk123]

Because the trackers aren't working for the media. Coulson got off lightly because otherwise they would've been screamed at for trying to shackle the 'freedom of the press'.
A freedom, we all know, each media outlet take liberties on.

The press should be free, the Govt. should not be in the game of writing the headlines.

We don't want Hugh Grant deciding what should be published.

 

[fowler9]

Pfft, if you've got nothing to hide you've got nothing to fear.

I think the Stasi said that too.

Ha ha. Spot on. Until the government decide later that what you said was wrong.

 

[Oswyntail]

....
Greedy power crazed politicians and their paymasters
....

I suspect most people would recognise this - and I suspect most people are wrong. 99.9% of the time, choosing between conspiracy or another reason, conspiracy will be the wrong answer. The intelligence officer extending wire taps genuinely thinks it is in the public good; the politician authorising it takes expert advice. Anyone who has seen how government works from the inside knows how ludicrous the idea of shadowy "paymasters" is - they would quickly realise there are more effective ways of influencing life. Decisions are as likely to be taken by low-grade civil servants as by politicians.
Of course we should be on our guard, but not to expose the corrupting influence of "Big Pharma", radical mosques or MI5. More important is that we should all be alert to the small things, the single changes in step, in themselves trivial but which lead to ruin. It is ourselves we should be watching.

 

[SS4]

The press should be free, the Govt. should not be in the game of writing the headlines.

We don't want Hugh Grant deciding what should be published.

A Press free to waive it's responsibilities in the name of profit?

At the same we don't want Paul Dacre deciding what gets published either. The idea of a free press is that anyone can publish anything. In reality the Press openly has political bias and meddles in political affairs to a worrying degree and I daresay influences those in power (see the so-called porn filter and how The Sun would have evaded such measures despite page 3!)

 

[DarloRich]

The press should be free, the Govt. should not be in the game of writing the headlines.

We don't want Hugh Grant deciding what should be published.

nor do we want Rupert Murdoch or his ilk to decide government policy, effectively to decide who should govern us and how or what story to publish or in what manner to publish a story.

The press have shown a manifest inability to govern themselves. Odd how in exactly the same situation they would be calling for further and tighter controls of other industries in a similar position. Strange that!

 

[meridian2]

The press should be free, the Govt. should not be in the game of writing the headlines.

We don't want Hugh Grant deciding what should be published.

Even if Hugh Grant IS deciding what gets published.

We all know what freedom is tantamount to in the press.

 

[DarloRich]

I suspect most people would recognise this - and I suspect most people are wrong. 99.9% of the time, choosing between conspiracy or another reason, conspiracy will be the wrong answer. The intelligence officer extending wire taps genuinely thinks it is in the public good; the politician authorising it takes expert advice. Anyone who has seen how government works from the inside knows how ludicrous the idea of shadowy "paymasters" is - they would quickly realise there are more effective ways of influencing life. Decisions are as likely to be taken by low-grade civil servants as by politicians.

but rabid, feverish conspiracy theories are so much more FUN

 

[cjp]

I suspect most people would recognise this - and I suspect most people are wrong. 99.9% of the time, choosing between conspiracy or another reason, conspiracy will be the wrong answer. Anyone who has seen how government works from the inside knows how ludicrous the idea of shadowy "paymasters" is - they would quickly realise there are more effective ways of influencing life. Decisions are as likely to be taken by low-grade civil servants as by politicians.
Of course we should be on our guard, but not to expose the corrupting influence of "Big Pharma", radical mosques or MI5. s we should be watching.

I think you are wrong.
I think that if "Lobbying" in some fashion or another did not work it would not be done.
I believe that people/companies/organisations spend to get a return in some fashion.


Politicitians in your pocket at at a price

We have have something we want to keep private otherwise why do people buy curtains? And now Powers want to look in on our private matters.
I do not want this, I do not trust the lookers

 

[starrymarkb]

A Press free to waive it's responsibilities in the name of profit?

At the same we don't want Paul Dacre deciding what gets published either. The idea of a free press is that anyone can publish anything. In reality the Press openly has political bias and meddles in political affairs to a worrying degree and I daresay influences those in power (see the so-called porn filter and how The Sun would have evaded such measures despite page 3!)

The Express is very keen on strict porn filtering, after all their publisher also does most of the top shelf. I think they think that people will move back to dirty magazines if online porn is banned!

 

[fowler9]

The Express is very keen on strict porn filtering, after all their publisher also does most of the top shelf. I think they think that people will move back to dirty magazines if online porn is banned!

Agree with you totally mate, the same press having a field day with Yewtree has run countdown stories to Emma Watson being 16 or what a big girl Charlotte Church is.

 

[GatwickDepress]

Agree with you totally mate, the same press having a field day with Yewtree has run countdown stories to Emma Watson being 16 or what a big girl Charlotte Church is.

Not creepy at all.

 

[Geezertronic]

Not creepy at all.

That is absolutely disgusting...

 

[fowler9]

Not creepy at all.

Yeah mate. They control the image you are being sold, they make the money. On one page sex fiends, on the next who you can legally fancy in the next few weeks. More than a bit creepy.

 

[Clip]

We have have something we want to keep private otherwise why do people buy curtains?

Erm, to block out the light when I want to sleep. To stop burglars looking in and seeing what I have got when I am out and theres no lights/movement going on and so that people dont see me having sex with me missus - its probably not as pretty to look at as I think it is.

 

[cjp]

Erm, to block out the light when I want to sleep.
To stop burglars looking in and seeing what I have got when I am out and theres no lights/movement going on
and so that people dont see me having sex with me missus - its probably not as pretty to look at as I think it is.

Your second and third reasons are because you wnat to enjoy some privacy which is fair enough
so
do you mind the government storing your emails so that someone might read them, listening to your telephone conversations - all without a warrant - just on the off-chance you might commit or consider (conspire) to commit a crime?

 

[Clip]

Your second and third reasons are because you wnat to enjoy some privacy which is fair enough
so
do you mind the government storing your emails so that someone might read them, listening to your telephone conversations - all without a warrant - just on the off-chance you might commit or consider (conspire) to commit a crime?

No, my second and third reasons are because I dont want to get robbed and people may not want to see me having sex. I dont really mind at all with that as I am quite adventurous but other people may not be so.

I dont want them snooping on anything of mine as thats my business but I can see why they may want it to be stored for access later, like if during an investigation and 6 months down the line someone else comes into the picture then they can grab some evidence but really its all a crock of rubbish. I dont trust them with much but it appears that this is what happens when you let the liberal party call some shots for letting the Tories get away with whatever they want to do.

Lets face it both the Libs and Labour have wanted similar for years but Labour never quite pushed it through. More reason for everyone to start encrypting their emails if you dont already.

 

[fowler9]

No, my second and third reasons are because I dont want to get robbed and people may not want to see me having sex. I dont really mind at all with that as I am quite adventurous but other people may not be so.

I dont want them snooping on anything of mine as thats my business but I can see why they may want it to be stored for access later, like if during an investigation and 6 months down the line someone else comes into the picture then they can grab some evidence but really its all a crock of rubbish. I dont trust them with much but it appears that this is what happens when you let the liberal party call some shots for letting the Tories get away with whatever they want to do.

Lets face it both the Libs and Labour have wanted similar for years but Labour never quite pushed it through. More reason for everyone to start encrypting their emails if you dont already.

Wow, you think curtains prevent burglary?

 

[Clip]

Wow, you think curtains prevent burglary?

No but im guessing a burglar would rather take their chances with a house without any up so they could see in first, which was kind of my point.

 

[BlythPower]

It's funny that they want to bring this in at a time when the Internet's buzzing with the Parliamentary Paedogeddon...

 

[fowler9]

No but im guessing a burglar would rather take their chances with a house without any up so they could see in first, which was kind of my point.

Sorry mate, my comment should really have had a smiley after it. I can see your point but most a lot of burglars/car thieves etc are opportunists and will just try door handles without checking what is inside and take whatever they can. As for the real professionals, they know who they are going after anyway. Decent double glazed window units and doors (Locked of course) will put off most of the bag head brigade.

 

[SS4]

Should anyone want to write to their MP you can use this link from the Open Rights Group. Just why does it need to be rushed through is my question...

 

[Jonny]

Your second and third reasons are because you wnat to enjoy some privacy which is fair enough
so
do you mind the government storing your emails so that someone might read them, listening to your telephone conversations - all without a warrant - just on the off-chance you might commit or consider (conspire) to commit a crime?

It's the implicit lack of trust that you mention that underpins the government's argument, that everyone is not only a potential criminal, but a potential serious criminal. We could improve our domestic security much more by not sucking up to the Yanks at every opportunity.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Should anyone want to write to their MP you can use this link from the Open Rights Group. Just why does it need to be rushed through is my question...

That is one of my questions as well, you're not the only one.

 

[fowler9]

It all reminds me of Prison Song by System Of A Down. They're trying to build a prison, for you and me to live in. That was actually about government drugs policy but still...

 

[maniacmartin]

They want to rush it through because once the data is deleted, they won't be able to get it back, and telcos are apparently getting itchy feet and considering deleting it

 

[fowler9]

Of course if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear. Ha ha ha ha ha.