Big Brother is here (Snoopers Charter)

barnardhobbit · **Joined:** 29 Sep 2010, 21:19 **Posts:** 4278

Facebook to back US cyber-security snooping bill

Facebook, AT&T, Intel, Verizon, and Microsoft are among some 800 US-based firms that have reacted positively to the bill, which is due before Congress on 23 April.

barnardhobbit · **Joined:** 29 Sep 2010, 21:19 **Posts:** 4278

The government is expected to publish the draft "Communications Bill" (Snoopers Charter) today that will give the Police,
HM Revenue and Customs and the Intelligence Services the right to request details of all web and phone activity.

This will include Twitter, Facebook, other Social Media data which no doubt will also include access to forums such as ReStirred.

Internet and phone companies will be forced to track every email, call and all web activity while the government is expected
to pay the costs of extracting and storing of all this data although the actual content will probably not be recorded.

representingthemambo · **Posted:** 14 Jun 2012, 12:53

An extremely worrying development. This government had just the one thing going for it: that they rejected ideas like ID cards and the previous government's encroachments on civil liberties. How can you say you are in favour of 'rolling back the frontiers of the state' whilst in the same breath providing the state with an unprecedented extension of its powers to snoop?

The other thing this highlights is that the government's whole 'we've run out of money' mantra is a lie. There are suddenly tens, if not hundreds of millions of pounds available for what will be a huge operation. Where has that come from? Isn't there something better to spend it on?

KingsHeathTory · **Joined:** 02 Oct 2010, 00:41 **Posts:** 129

I agree. I think this proves what we have isn't a proper right wing Tory government. Sounds like a dream for the Civil service.

On the money thing, I don't think we know enough about whether this has been factored in to an existing budget, or whether new money is required.

sally 123 · **Joined:** 03 Feb 2012, 22:48 **Posts:** 1512

I have just one question -why?

allthatissolidmeltsintoair · **Joined:** 21 Oct 2010, 16:20 **Posts:** 421

Quote:

I have just one question -why?

paedoterrorism
terrophiles
international paedoterrorists
extreme domesticterrophiles
paedobombers
paedocide

johnhemming · **Joined:** 29 Sep 2010, 12:43 **Posts:** 1188

It sounds like an exercise in illiberal futility.

representingthemambo · **Posted:** 14 Jun 2012, 16:01

KingsHeathTory wrote:

I agree. I think this proves what we have isn't a proper right wing Tory government. Sounds like a dream for the Civil service.

On the money thing, I don't think we know enough about whether this has been factored in to an existing budget, or whether new money is required.

This sheds a little light on it:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/20 ... ffice-cost

To be fair it isn't completely clear if all the money is new money but it is still enormously expensive and politically disgusting, and Theresa May's comments were those of a drone who seems to have been wholly captured by the security 'industry'.

As per usual on questions of individual liberty, David Davis' analysis is spot-on. (It's a shame that the rest of his political views are so woeful.....)

ianrobo · **Joined:** 28 Sep 2010, 15:55 **Posts:** 5268

johnhemming wrote:

It sounds like an exercise in illiberal futility.

so John I presume all the LD MP's will actually vote against, all the peers will and as ed M has said we are against this bill can never go through

correct ?

derogatory · **Joined:** 28 Sep 2010, 20:55 **Posts:** 3165

It seems to me that such systems would actually be quite detrimental to national security, in so far as whoever had access to them would potentially have unprecedented scope for systematic blackmail of senior officials.

ianrobo · **Joined:** 28 Sep 2010, 15:55 **Posts:** 5268

I am shocked DT after what we had to do with a similar bill, after Cameron said what he said and the LD's in govt this has got back on again.

It seems to me it is a bill designed to split the government and the Tories. You can bet that the likes of Carswell, David Davies on the Tory side will be well onto this.

Got no chance of getting through as it stands so what is the lower aim they hope the mugs (us) settle for ?

johnhemming · **Joined:** 29 Sep 2010, 12:43 **Posts:** 1188

ianrobo wrote:

so John I presume all the LD MP's will actually vote against, all the peers will and as ed M has said we are against this bill can never go through

correct ?

It is a draft bill being reviewed by a committee. What happens to any bill depends upon what the bill actually contains.

ianrobo · **Joined:** 28 Sep 2010, 15:55 **Posts:** 5268

John, beyond what we have now and you said Labour were too illiberal do we need any more ?

been in this govt for two years, no urgent need is there ?

johnhemming · **Joined:** 29 Sep 2010, 12:43 **Posts:** 1188

Technically it is a brain dead proposal. That should be recognised relatively easily.

LiKW · **Joined:** 30 Sep 2010, 19:43 **Posts:** 2292

johnhemming wrote:

Technically it is a brain dead proposal. That should be recognised relatively easily.

Nice way to talk about Theresa May there John...

bunnyson · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2011, 23:05 **Posts:** 768

There is a previous, longer thread 'Big Brother is Here': http://www.restirred.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2473&start=30&hilit=traffic+analysis

Moderators could you merge them please?

OK DONE

barnardhobbit · **Joined:** 29 Sep 2010, 21:19 **Posts:** 4278

Link to Draft Communications Data Bill (PDF)

ianrobo · **Joined:** 28 Sep 2010, 15:55 **Posts:** 5268

johnhemming wrote:

Technically it is a brain dead proposal. That should be recognised relatively easily.

This is the thing that stuns us all including many tories, how on earth did it get THAT far , that is the question that needs answering.

Do you think in these times £1.8BN could be spent elsewhere ?

johnhemming · **Joined:** 29 Sep 2010, 12:43 **Posts:** 1188

I suppose a draft bill is not exactly "that far".

http://johnhemming.blogspot.co.uk/2012/ ... -bill.html

Is my comment.

We now live in a state where if you say wrong things to your children they use that a reason to take them away from you.

The proposal is to also track who people talk to online. It is not possible, but also wrong. It is like putting a chip into everyone's skull in an attempt to find out who people talk to.

barnardhobbit · **Joined:** 29 Sep 2010, 21:19 **Posts:** 4278

Draft Communications Data Bill: Daft and Dangerous

Section 25 states that Postal Communications are included does that mean that the government plan to open all snail mail to find out who sent it ??

derogatory · **Joined:** 28 Sep 2010, 20:55 **Posts:** 3165

Is that not going back to the 16th and 17th centuries and systematic surveillance of post by the Postmaster General?

ianrobo · **Joined:** 28 Sep 2010, 15:55 **Posts:** 5268

It is wrong and all freedom loving people of the left, centre and right should unite against this.

sally 123 · **Joined:** 03 Feb 2012, 22:48 **Posts:** 1512

Thats why they want to privatise the Royal mail! The post is property of the crown, when posted with a stamp showing the Queens head, the post office has the duty of delivering to the person the letter is addressed to, that doesn't mean via 10 Downing Street

derogatory · **Joined:** 28 Sep 2010, 20:55 **Posts:** 3165

sally 123 wrote:

Thats why they want to privatise the Royal mail! The post is property of the crown, when posted with a stamp showing the Queens head, the post office has the duty of delivering to the person the letter is addressed to, that doesn't mean via 10 Downing Street

Surely exactly the converse is true? If the Royal Mail's post is property of the Crown, then all the easier for the Crown to examine it, no? Introducing multiple couriers presumably makes it more complex to have systems to monitor mail?

Re~Stirred Forum

Big Brother is here (Snoopers Charter)

Who is online