Britain to introduce legislation to monitor internet use

[geriatrickid]

This will supposedly be announced in the Queen's Speech as the way the current UK government wants to go in the future.

However as far as I remember it has to be proposed as a bill in Parliament and discussed and voted on there.

IF it passes that hurdle it is then sent to the House of Lords for discussion and voted on there.

IF it passes both of those hurdles it then goes back to the House of Commons and then a law is enacted and I presume the Queen has to sign it off.

It can be modified or rejected in either house before final assent so it will take some time to happen yet.

Unless things have drastically changed over the last decade? then the House of Lords,can only advise the Government,and their vote means very little, unless the Government of the day decides to accept their extra proposals.

http://www.legislati...pga/Geo5/1-2/13

They can hold up legislation and drag it. They can also embarrass a government with some tough questioning. They've done it before. There are some keen legal minds in the HoL and some people of both right and left political affiliations that will have some very pointed questioning. Imagine the pickle the government would be in if the HoL rejected the Bill 2X.

Also the HoL can hold up the funding for the endeavour for at least a month and disrupt things longer if they are annoyed.

Edited April 3, 2012 by geriatrickid

[maiphedmaiaroi]

One of the reasons I treat this topic so cavalierly is that the government already has this power, albeit in a more cubersome and roundabout manner. It has been able to monitor communications since the start of electronic communications. In previous years there were not even any safeguards or obstacles to the government accessing information. The introduction of privacy laws in the 80's and 90's created a regulatory mess for the government with conflicting statutes. National Security allowing it, but Privacy Act denying it. The need to set out a more specific framework is due to the mess arising from the hacking of people's mobile phones, facebook and twitter accounts by some "journalists". You know, the same group that bleats on about freedom of the press and expression.

The fact of the matter is that the legislation has yet to be debated, none of the people offering up negative assessments have seen the legislation and no one has paid attention to key requirements such as a warrant being required.

LOL

[midas]

Conservative MP and former shadow home secretary David Davis said it would make it easier for the government "to eavesdrop on vast numbers of people".

"What this is talking about doing is not focusing on terrorists or criminals, it's absolutely everybody's emails, phone calls, web access..." he told the BBC.

"All that's got to be recorded for two years and the government will be able to get at it with no by your leave from anybody."

He said that until now anyone wishing to monitor communications had been required to gain permission from a magistrate.

"You shouldn't go beyond that in a decent civilised society, but that's what's being proposed."

'Attack on privacy'

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17576745

[midas]

this is beginning to look like a global trend

case in point.....Oz down under ( and New Zealand )

Government plans to monitor without court authorisation

" THE federal government wants your personal internet data, and it does not want to have to apply to a court to get it."

http://www.smh.com.a...00611-y3lq.html

Government plans to filter New Zealand Internet

http://www.freitasm.com/6625

Edited April 3, 2012 by midas

[Steely Dan]

Then of course there were the recent riots and looting in the UK organized by all accounts using portable web devices with online maps to tweet which shops they intended to loot next, perhaps it is this sort of info that needs real time access as oppose to court orders granted.

[MAJIC]

This will supposedly be announced in the Queen's Speech as the way the current UK government wants to go in the future.

However as far as I remember it has to be proposed as a bill in Parliament and discussed and voted on there.

IF it passes that hurdle it is then sent to the House of Lords for discussion and voted on there.

IF it passes both of those hurdles it then goes back to the House of Commons and then a law is enacted and I presume the Queen has to sign it off.

It can be modified or rejected in either house before final assent so it will take some time to happen yet.

Unless things have drastically changed over the last decade? then the House of Lords,can only advise the Government,and their vote means very little, unless the Government of the day decides to accept their extra proposals.

http://www.legislati...pga/Geo5/1-2/13

They can hold up legislation and drag it. They can also embarrass a government with some tough questioning. They've done it before. There are some keen legal minds in the HoL and some people of both right and left political affiliations that will have some very pointed questioning. Imagine the pickle the government would be in if the HoL rejected the Bill 2X.

Also the HoL can hold up the funding for the endeavour for at least a month and disrupt things longer if they are annoyed.

Yes GK,They can play the annoying snappy Terrier,nipping away at the ankles,but there has been much talk over the years of abolishing the HoL,because it is a Toothless Tiger, with no real Powers.

Personally however I would never advocate it,to be abolished,they are necessary for checks and balances,with whatever Party is in Power.

Although others say it's a Rich mans Club,i.e make a daily appearance,sign for your £300 a day (or thereabouts) ,and go home,down to the private bar, or on the Town.answerable to nobody, don't think "Oliver Cromwell"would be at all impressed with the present day,House of Lords.

Do you?

[Exsexyman]

That facts are when you scare people and create fear you can control them.

“Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you”

Kurt Cobain quotes

Ah yes, Kurt Cobain, a very well rounded individual.

[Exsexyman]

The big question is WHY are governments doing this? I can only think of two possibilities, one is to prevent Islamic terrorism, or more worryingly to break up resistance to mass immigration. The other is concerning cyber-crime, hacking etc. Whatever, either by happenstance or design there are good reasons why governments are doing this, though I don't approve for myself and this was a small part of my reason for being here.

To prevent Islamic terrorism? Or more worryingly to break up resistance to mass immigration? Oh dear. Could you just remind me, what was the latest abhorrent terrorist attack in Europe? Could it be in Scandinavia? By a nutter who held similar views to the ones you are expressing? Not an Islamist? But a white supremacist? Who clearly held similar views to you?

The old Etonian fools who are now running the UK are fast becoming a laughing stock, even amongst the Tory Party! They are rapidly becoming a figure of fun, making up stupid policies on the hoof in a desperate attempt to appease their masters in the USA. And relying on people like you on internet forums around the world to try and give credibility to these laughable attempts to scare the populace into giving up their hard fought rights to free speech. I believe the politically correct expression is, 'Useful idiot'. How does it feel?

[TAWP]

One solution is to use live fire on rioters. Do it a couple of times and the mobs will get the picture.

Easy peasy.

problem solved.

So live fire is ok in the UK but not Thailand?

[theblether]

It can't be any more freaky than the amount of tracking that is done by Google and others to us here on the internet. It's really quite unbelievable.

[Markaew]

This will supposedly be announced in the Queen's Speech as the way the current UK government wants to go in the future.

However as far as I remember it has to be proposed as a bill in Parliament and discussed and voted on there.

IF it passes that hurdle it is then sent to the House of Lords for discussion and voted on there.

IF it passes both of those hurdles it then goes back to the House of Commons and then a law is enacted and I presume the Queen has to sign it off.

It can be modified or rejected in either house before final assent so it will take some time to happen yet.

When doesn't a government pass a law to spy or control it's citizens once it's introduced? When an opportunity arises such a crisis then governments are quick to jump at the chance.

[anterian]

This type of legislation always comes in second in the technology race. We saw it with Pirate radio stations, with CB radio, and now with the Internet. Using proxy servers, encryption technology, hacking skills, etc the people the governments want to check, evade them. In fact the term used by agencies checking the Internet often refer to it as "noise" or "chatter", an increase in chatter means something is coming down.

To examine the stored messages of over 60 million people cannot be done in real time, even using "intelligent algorithms".

[Steely Dan]

The big question is WHY are governments doing this? I can only think of two possibilities, one is to prevent Islamic terrorism, or more worryingly to break up resistance to mass immigration. The other is concerning cyber-crime, hacking etc. Whatever, either by happenstance or design there are good reasons why governments are doing this, though I don't approve for myself and this was a small part of my reason for being here.

To prevent Islamic terrorism? Or more worryingly to break up resistance to mass immigration? Oh dear. Could you just remind me, what was the latest abhorrent terrorist attack in Europe? Could it be in Scandinavia? By a nutter who held similar views to the ones you are expressing? Not an Islamist? But a white supremacist? Who clearly held similar views to you?

The old Etonian fools who are now running the UK are fast becoming a laughing stock, even amongst the Tory Party! They are rapidly becoming a figure of fun, making up stupid policies on the hoof in a desperate attempt to appease their masters in the USA. And relying on people like you on internet forums around the world to try and give credibility to these laughable attempts to scare the populace into giving up their hard fought rights to free speech. I believe the politically correct expression is, 'Useful idiot'. How does it feel?

I'll ignore your slander, but I understand in the total absence of facts that's what the left are reduced to. I'll just observe that Breivik by his own admission was a cultural Christian with no religious beliefs who was lamenting the erosion of his culture, which is a totally different matter to race, so hardly a 'white supremacist'. Besides which Breivik was one lone madman as oppose to thousands with a sick and insane ideology responsible for over 16,600 terrorist attacks since 9/11, including the 7/7 attacks in London. We are also getting close to the Olympics and I expect the culture enrichers are planning something to coincide with that.

P.S It's more than a bit rich you mouthing off about free speech seeing as that is exactly what the OIC and their left wing stooges are trying to limit.

[Mosha]

Funny thing about 1984 was the way big business/trading blocks led to that world of 1984. Now we have business supplying armed forces in at least one nation. I know it's a conspiracy theory movie, but has anyone else watched Farenheit911?

[Kananga]

Got something to hide? Well you're being watched.

Got nothing to hide, got nothing to worry about.

Dont like it, dont use the internet. Simple.

People think too highly of themselves... We're all just fuc_king ants man. Ants.

[schondie]

The UK government at its finest as usual - lecture countries such as China, Iran and any other number of oppressive regimes about freedom of speech and democracy and then just do the same as these countries do but in a way to save us from terrorists, drug dealers and paedophiles (Think of the children!!!!).

As with all attempts to control the free flow of information and let the vast majority of law abiding people have some crumb of privacy on the internet under the guise of catching the criminals etc it's a loser even before it's been officially started. Net savvy terrorists and paedophiles will just use VPNs, PGP encryption and "dark nets" for their nefarious purposes.

The UK really is a democratically elected dictorship that has slowly stripped peoples freedoms away over the past 30 or so years. I hate going back there as it seems you cannot just live anymore without worrying about all these rules and regulations governing every aspect of your life.

Labour or Conservative, it matters not who you vote for as they all have the same policies in my opinion.

[baboon]

Got something to hide? Well you're being watched.

Got nothing to hide, got nothing to worry about.

Dont like it, dont use the internet. Simple.

People think too highly of themselves... We're all just fuc_king ants man. Ants.

How much money do you have? What is your address? When did you last have sex? If you`ve nothing to hide, why not tell us?....

[folium]

The big question is WHY are governments doing this? I can only think of two possibilities, one is to prevent Islamic terrorism, or more worryingly to break up resistance to mass immigration.

We are not going to sit and watch that we are made a minority in our own country. We do not accept it; it is unacceptable.

We shall fight. We shall fight against the traitors in the Labor Party and against political activists that work for other organizations that support multiculturalism and Islamification. The attacks on 7/22 were preventative attacks for the defense of Norway’s indigenous people, ethnic Norwegians.

Transcript of Anders Brievik's statement in Oslo Court, 5 Feb 2012.

Perhaps the logic, and sadly, the actions, of people like Brievik are a good reason that they should be electronically monitored by any government intent on protecting its citizens. Resisting mass immigration does seem to have nasty side-effects, at least for some of its more extreme proponents.

Obviously for those intent on provoking a clash of civilizations, both the muslim terrorists and defenders of indigenous rights have a vital role to play.

"Indigenous" is the "new black" (pun intended) when it comes to extremist views, hence the use by groups such as the BNP, EDL (a favourite of Brievik's), and fellow travellers. If you want a laugh check out the Indigenous Weekend (spot the non-white person) clip on YouTube.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5GvewIAmC4

[EarthAlien]

Terrorism is a FACT and conspiracy theory stuff claiming otherwise is ridiculous. I do not like these laws, but, unfortunately, there is plenty of justification for them. I always thought that 1984 was purely fictional, but it looks like things are headed that way and soon.

Terrorism is the invisible enemy that world governements have invented to justify war mongering and removal of the rights and freedoms of individuals. Not saying that that's the sole reality of it but it is a very convenient mechanism that has been harnessed and implemented in the fundamental goal for absolute control of society and the world.

To not acknowledge that as an inextricable element of the "FACT(s)" is a display of the foolishness that the world governments are indeed relying upon.

Thank goodness not all are so easily fooled!

[Somtamnication]

Never been a big fan of the French, but I gotta say, they have balls and no p.c. in their blood for kicking out the muslim radicals and other issues related to the islamisation of their country. I wish the UK would do the same.

I am a big advocate for privacy, but what is happening in Europe is ridiculous.

[Steely Dan]

The big question is WHY are governments doing this? I can only think of two possibilities, one is to prevent Islamic terrorism, or more worryingly to break up resistance to mass immigration.

We are not going to sit and watch that we are made a minority in our own country. We do not accept it; it is unacceptable.

We shall fight. We shall fight against the traitors in the Labor Party and against political activists that work for other organizations that support multiculturalism and Islamification. The attacks on 7/22 were preventative attacks for the defense of Norway’s indigenous people, ethnic Norwegians.

Transcript of Anders Brievik's statement in Oslo Court, 5 Feb 2012.

Perhaps the logic, and sadly, the actions, of people like Brievik are a good reason that they should be electronically monitored by any government intent on protecting its citizens. Resisting mass immigration does seem to have nasty side-effects, at least for some of its more extreme proponents.

Obviously for those intent on provoking a clash of civilizations, both the muslim terrorists and defenders of indigenous rights have a vital role to play.

"Indigenous" is the "new black" (pun intended) when it comes to extremist views, hence the use by groups such as the BNP, EDL (a favourite of Brievik's), and fellow travellers. If you want a laugh check out the Indigenous Weekend (spot the non-white person) clip on YouTube.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5GvewIAmC4

I have no problem with monitoring extemists, however it would appear that anyone who objects to soaring crime rates, inner city no go zones, foreign law and constraints on free speech are now branded bigots, xenophobes or racists. Actually the EDL were described as naive but well meaning by Breivik and Nick Griffin the BNP leader so to conjoin the BNP & EDL together is not being intellectually honest.

There was a meeting of European defense leagues in Denmark last weekend and as per usual the number of arrests of these so called extremists was dwarfed by those arrested belonging to ANTIFA, indeed this is almost invariably the case when Unite against (sic) fascism counter demonstrate against the EDL in the UK so who are the extremists?

P.S Here is another example of what the UK authorities are up against, notice it from a Sikh community forum complaining about Muslim gangs in the UK grooming and raping underage girls. Understandably they are upset when the BBC refer to the accused in such cases as 'Asian' tarring them by association. Just look at the list without your PC specs on and you can see there is a problem which warrants increased surveillance.

http://www.sikhsanga...g-muslim-gangs/

I'm on the same page as the Sikhs on this one, though I doubt they would be welcome at the 'indigenous weekend'.

Edited April 5, 2012 by Steely Dan

[how241]

I'm sure that many countries have "quietly" been doing the same, for years. A necesary evil in this age of terrorist.

[midas]

Got something to hide? Well you're being watched.

Got nothing to hide, got nothing to worry about.

Dont like it, dont use the internet. Simple.

People think too highly of themselves... We're all just fuc_king ants man. Ants.

you are grossly oversimplifying the situation. Just using your GPS cell phone

gives these people a stack of information and what if in the future

a simple criticism of political figures results in a knock on the door in the wee hours of the morning?

[folium]

Got something to hide? Well you're being watched.

Got nothing to hide, got nothing to worry about.

Dont like it, dont use the internet. Simple.

People think too highly of themselves... We're all just fuc_king ants man. Ants.

you are grossly oversimplifying the situation. Just using your GPS cell phone

gives these people a stack of information and what if in the future

a simple criticism of political figures results in a knock on the door in the wee hours of the morning?

Sounds like LOS today.

[Baerboxer]

If not a April first joke, then a step towards fascism...

or communism; or any other descriptive of a totalatarian state system that oppresses individual freedoms and democracy with state control. Sadly, seems more countires are heading this way. Totally in favour of stopping terrorism, but this will be open to leaks and misuse for sure.

[tragickingdom]

England never cared too much about freedom of speech and about human rights. THey might show their finger to the rest of the world but Australia is full of descendants of children that were send there for doing nothing. Britain if full of fossils that think they know how the world works. Look at the house of Lords, it is comparable with the appointed senator in Thailand. Instead of listening in to people, they should start modernizing their country. Replacing old roads with new ones and so on.

[JohnAllan]

On one hand I know I'm not into anything dodgey so I'm quite happy as I know this is ultimately being done to protect my country. At the same time though it does feel a tad too much of an invasion into my privacy. What if such information were to fall into the wrong hands?

As is apt to happen where UK government [in]competence is a factor.

[JohnAllan]

One of the reasons I treat this topic so cavalierly is that the government already has this power, albeit in a more cubersome and roundabout manner. It has been able to monitor communications since the start of electronic communications. In previous years there were not even any safeguards or obstacles to the government accessing information. The introduction of privacy laws in the 80's and 90's created a regulatory mess for the government with conflicting statutes. National Security allowing it, but Privacy Act denying it. The need to set out a more specific framework is due to the mess arising from the hacking of people's mobile phones, facebook and twitter accounts by some "journalists". You know, the same group that bleats on about freedom of the press and expression.

The fact of the matter is that the legislation has yet to be debated, none of the people offering up negative assessments have seen the legislation and no one has paid attention to key requirements such as a warrant being required.

Actually correct. GCHQ already have - and have had for as long as the technology has been available - the means to listen-in to all sources of communications. That is, after all, why it exists. Of more concern should be its relationship with the CIA. Yes, there is one, surprise, surprise!

[thaimat]

Many democracies around the world continue to trample their own laws, always in the name of fighting "terrorism". Spread the fear, then you are able to control the people. Worked for Hitler, George Dubbleya. To get rid of terrorism, all you need to do is eliminate the need for Saudi oil. If every country produces their own power, which is not, in spite of all the oil industry's propaganda, difficult to do, the Saudi's will have to take care of their own class system problem, (which is the root of almost all the Muslim "terrorism" issues, western countries' foreign policy focus will completely shift, and the "terrorism" issue for America and Europe will be mostly gone. All without trampling anyone's civil rights, and at the same time will create a huge industry, and many millions of jobs worldwide.

[Credo]

There are two separate, but related issues. First is the issue of privacy and rights and second is the issue of terrorism.

The second issue is not going to go away simply because Western countries find alternatives to oil. The issue is complex, it is about religion and other resources. Should the Middle East not have money from the sale of oil, then there are large and growing populations which will fight for resources such as food and water. This will happen regardless of whether it is done in the name of Allah or Hunger.

I am not about the best way to tackle the problem, but we must tackle the problem.