http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolog...-new-laws.htmlInternet activity 'to be monitored' under new laws
Ministers are preparing a major expansion of the Government's powers to monitor the email exchanges and website visits of every person in the UK, it was reported today.
Under legislation expected in next month's Queen's Speech, internet companies will be instructed to install hardware enabling GCHQ – the Government's electronic "listening" agency – to examine "on demand" any phone call made, text message and email sent, and website accessed in "real time", The Sunday Times reported.
A previous attempt to introduce a similar law was abandoned by the former Labour government in 2006 in the face of fierce opposition.
However ministers believe it is essential that the police and security services have access to such communications data in order to tackle terrorism and protect the public.
Although GCHQ would not be able to access the content of such communications without a warrant, the legislation would enable it to trace people individuals or groups are in contact with, and how often and for how long they are in communication.
The Home Office confirmed that ministers were intending to legislate "as soon as parliamentary time allows".
"It is vital that police and security services are able to obtain communications data in certain circumstances to investigate serious crime and terrorism and to protect the public. We need to take action to maintain the continued availability of communications data as technology changes," a spokesman said.
"Communications data includes time, duration and dialling numbers of a phone call, or an email address. It does not include the content of any phone call or email and it is not the intention of Government to make changes to the existing legal basis for the interception of communications."
Nick Pickles, director of the Big Brother Watch campaign group, said: "This is an unprecedented step that will see Britain adopt the same kind of surveillance seen in China and Iran.
"This is an absolute attack on privacy online and it is far from clear this will actually improve public safety, while adding significant costs to internet businesses.
"If this was such a serious security issue why has the Home Office not ensured these powers were in place before the Olympics?"
Shami Chakrabarti, director of the civil rights group Liberty, said that both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats had resisted the plan when they were in opposition.
"There is an element of whoever you vote for the empire strikes back," she told Sky News's Murnaghan programme.
"This is more ambitious than anything that has been done before. It is a pretty drastic step in a democracy.
"It was resisted under the last government. The coalition bound itself together in the language of civil liberties. Do they still mean it?"
Conservative backbencher Margot James said ministers would come under pressure to water down the proposals as the legislation passed through Parliament.
"I am sure there will be considerable pressure brought to bear as the proposals are debated for protections to be built in to protect people's privacy," she told the Murnaghan programme.
What's scary to me is that they're advertising it, like it's no big deal. Obviously our governments are watching what we do and say. I'd be surprised if the CIA/NSA/whatever in the U.S. DID NOT have tools that automatically find emails/posts/websites with certain words.
It's funny how slippery slopes aren't valid unless you're looking at them from the bottom of the hill.
Slippery slopes aren't valid.Originally Posted by kevinsmith
It's funny how slippery slopes aren't valid unless you're looking at them from the bottom of the hill.
Concerns about what might happen when one examines the trends of what has happened and what is happening is deemed unfounded by some douchey Internet poster who thinks it's a televised debate or something.
Not that I'm calling you a douche, I'm just saying, there are concerns about the direction of things, and I think to immediately brush off those concerns over some dogmatic adherence to scholarly rules that don't really apply to this forum anyway considering many other "rules" aren't followed either is just as much a mechanism of ignoring something someone may not want to hear as it could be a mechanism for falsely changing the tide of discourse.
But there you're actually using reasoning. Slippery slopes don't have any reasoning. "If we allow gays to marry, what's next?" That's a slippery slope. "History shows that when gays get married... blah blah blah"
Terrible example but I'm sure you see what I mean.
i'm more interested in the fact that dual is awol.
EBN faggot list: The Wire Laborer. Pro American, anti-abortionist, real american hero. America, Fuck yeah!.I let my gun do the talking - kevinbacon
No, I see what you mean. But it's fairly acknowledged in the big picture. Maybe that's just because of an inherent disagreement on what has been historically happening. Take the healthcare debate, for example. I've said one thing I don't like about it is that it is an example of increased government interaction in our lives. I've drawn comparisons to the Patriot Act and how it's scope has increased as it's been used for other purposes, but such examples of government growth and misuse of laws is always deemed "slippery slope" arguments and automatically viewed as useless. I say it's not useless, we've seen such actions all the time.
This story here is another example. Look at the UK's march towards an Orwellian society. Now, combine that historical progress with the fact that when in recent memory has their government, or ours, dramatically REDUCED their authority on something major?
I know I've called you out on using slippery slopes but I honestly can't remember the context. Maybe I was just not fully thinking through your points. I dunno.
And to your credit, it is entirely possible I didn't fully elucidate my stance. I'm good at that...I'm thinking something, and expect someone else to be right there with me on that journey even though the trip from point A to point B was all in my head, and I say B thinking they know the process that took me there. lol
Alright UK, it's time:
Remember remember, the fifth of November.....
- H.L. MenckenHonor is simply the morality of superior men.
this law will get defeated in the commons.
unlike the US senate, mp's actually read the legislation before passing it *cough patriot act cough"
ahhh...you meant to say patient protection and affordable care act...thats funnythis law will get defeated in the commons.
unlike the US senate, mp's actually read the legislation before passing it *cough patriot act cough"
"The nation which forgets its defenders will itself be forgotten." - Calvin Coolidge
what?
hardly if any us senator read the patriot act bar ron paul before it was rammed through.
update on this law btw.
it is going to be put to a draft to be effectively buried.
If we accept one slippery slope argument it's just a matter of time before we're banging sheep....It's funny how slippery slopes aren't valid unless you're looking at them from the bottom of the hill.
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote