UK Government using Woolwich murder to push through Data Communications Bill
40 replies, posted
[quote]
Theresa May: "We need to see if there are additional steps we should be taking to prevent radicalisation"
Labour and the Conservatives could unite to push through the controversial communications bill despite Lib Dem objections, a former Tory leader says.
The bill, allowing the monitoring of [b]all[/b] UK citizens' internet use, was dropped after a split in the coalition.
But Lord Howard said David Cameron had "to act in the national interest" following the Woolwich murder.
Labour leader Ed Miliband has said that "if he [the PM] wants a communications bill, we'll help him get it through".
Mr Miliband told the Commons earlier this month that if Mr Cameron was being forced to drop certain policies because of "people behind him" - his own backbenchers - then Labour would step in. [/quote]
In a nutshell, this bill would allow police or security services access to ALL communication data without a warrant.
Source: [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22673156[/url]
But the murder didn't have any kind of link to the internet in the first place, are the torys fucking serious...?
[editline]26th May 2013[/editline]
My shed got blown away by the wind, this is a good reason to monitor the internet I think
The funny thing about this is that all these terror suspects were already known to the authorities before the attacks, so why do we need this to use against them?
Fuck that shit. I hate to say it, but if this bill passes we'll be one step closer to George Orwell being correct. If this goes through, I'll be glad I don't live in England. I have no respect for a government which doesn't respect the privacy of its citizens.
[B][I]Labour leader Ed Miliband has said that "if he [the PM] wants a communications bill, we'll help him get it through".[/I][/B]
Hmm. I've never seen the Lib Dems look so lonely.
[QUOTE=blehblehbleh;40794188]Fuck that shit. I hate to say it, but if this bill passes we'll be one step closer to George Orwell being correct. If this goes through, I'll be glad I don't live in England. I have no respect for a government which doesn't respect the privacy of its citizens.[/QUOTE]
Not just England. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are affected too.
[QUOTE]Mr Miliband told the Commons earlier this month that if Mr Cameron was being forced to drop certain policies because of "people behind him" - his own backbenchers - then Labour would step in.[/QUOTE]
Interesting stance for Labour to take, helping their rivals in power :v:
[QUOTE=Camundongo;40794339]Interesting stance for Labour to take, helping their rivals in power :v:[/QUOTE]
They may be opponents, but Labour are still conservatives.
[QUOTE=Arsonist;40794011]In a nutshell, this bill would allow police or security services access to ALL communication data without a warrant.[/QUOTE]
Hold up, that's not exactly true.
[quote]The Communications Data Bill would have given police and security services access, without a warrant, to details of all online communication in the UK - such as the time, duration, originator and recipient, and the location of the device from which it was made.
It would also give access to all Britons' web browsing history and details of messages sent on social media. [B]The police would have to get a warrant from the home secretary to be able to access the actual content of conversations and messages[/B][/quote]
Being able to see that a communication is taking place but not the actual message isn't nearly as invasive as being able to read anything any time. It's still an invasion of privacy but it's not as bad as it could be.
Out of curiosity, in the UK, do the police need a warrant to check someone's phone logs?
[QUOTE=catbarf;40794621]Hold up, that's not exactly true.
Being able to see that a communication is taking place but not the actual message isn't nearly as invasive as being able to read anything any time. It's still an invasion of privacy but it's not as bad as it could be.
Out of curiosity, in the UK, do the police need a warrant to check someone's phone logs?[/QUOTE]
The whole uproar against communications monitoring isn't so much how invasive it is, it's the "give an inch and they take a mile" thing. Once they reach a point where people stop giving a shit about something, they can progressively pass much more invasive laws. It's somewhat similar to the Prohibition era, nobody would vouch for an outright ban on alcohol, but gradually, they squeezed it through, after they allowed people to get used to the modest changes that already occurred.
This government is fucking useless.
This is the most pointless unrelated solution you could possible have for such an incident. Maybe improve education instead perhaps?
[QUOTE=blehblehbleh;40794188]Fuck that shit. I hate to say it, but if this bill passes we'll be one step closer to George Orwell being correct.[/QUOTE]
Minus the fact that authoritarian regimes are incompetent and become exponentially more incompetent the more authoritarian they become.
This whole "Independence" carry on is beginning to sound pretty good to me.
[QUOTE=kebab52;40794877]This whole "Independence" carry on is beginning to sound pretty good to me.[/QUOTE]
I'm voting no over here.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;40794907]I'm voting no over here.[/QUOTE]
I'm not going to post how I'm going to vote but all I'll say is that things like this don't exactly help the whole "better together" campaign.
Just my opinion though.
'radicalization' is such a shit word, is there some kind of website people go to which magically 'radicalizes' them and makes them want to stab, shoot and blow up people?
I think a more radical idea is restricting people's freedoms under the pretense of combating terrorism
Of course the right wing would exploit this event to push through some absurd bill that wouldn't pass otherwise. Liberals do it too I guess but to a lesser extent and with reasonable bills half of the time.
I'd write to my local MP but they're a die-hard Conservative that never vote against their party. It's such a damn shame.
Oh well, I'm off from university for the summer so lots of time to join in on protests if they get organised.
They can already monitor suspects Internet use using the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/NTWv0tA.jpg[/img]
(sorry for the meme)
I know its not a popular opinion because it means bowing down or listening to the demands of the "terrorists". But when things get rough in your own ward (ie loosing your freedoms, privacy), maybe its time to settle down and actually think of the root cause...
[url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/23/woolwich-attack-terrorism-blowback[/url]
[quote="JFK"]Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment.[/quote]
I'm fairly certain this might be an infringement of the Human Rights Act? It seems like a gross neglect of your citizens' privacy, at the very least.
If they go through with it I hope they can find enough people who are emotionally dead so they don't kill themselves with people just constantly browsing shock images.
Human rights will use the European court to block this. Not all things in Europe are useless.
[QUOTE=Viper202;40794054]But the murder didn't have any kind of link to the internet in the first place, are the [B]torys[/B] fucking serious...?
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Memobot;40794225][B][I]Labour leader Ed Miliband has said that "if he [the PM] wants a communications bill, we'll help him get it through".[/I][/B]
Hmm. I've never seen the Lib Dems look so lonely.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Camundongo;40794339]Interesting stance for Labour to take, helping their rivals in power :v:[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;40794439]They may be opponents, but Labour are still conservatives.[/QUOTE]
As I recall Labour first proposed this in 2008 under the IMP - interesting how successive governments just carry on the same shit the last one did but under a different banner
[QUOTE=jewdozer;40799957]Human rights will use the European court to block this. Not all things in Europe are useless.[/QUOTE]
A similiar law has already been instituted in Sweden, The military, police and secret police is allowed to access all internet traffic that is out and inbound to Sweden, and logs all of it as well, without the need of prior approval. Nothing has been done about it, I believe there were similiar parts in IPRED as well, which was instituted by the EU.
[QUOTE=deltasquid;40798861]I'm fairly certain this might be an infringement of the Human Rights Act? It seems like a gross neglect of your citizens' privacy, at the very least.[/QUOTE]
Yeah but the Conservatives say they would scrap that.
Oh dear.
[QUOTE=007JamesBond007;40800167]Yeah but the Conservatives say they would scrap that.[/QUOTE]
Except it would be replaced by a British Bill of Rights that would enshrine human rights into British law
[editline]edit[/editline]
It's also not going to happen because of Lib Dem opposition
[QUOTE=butt2089;40800256]Except it would be replaced by a British Bill of Rights that would enshrine human rights into British law[/QUOTE]
Yeah, like I'd trust this government to ensure my rights when they're perfectly willing to remove the current law under every exception they get. Sounds legit!
[QUOTE=butt2089;40800256]It's also not going to happen because of Lib Dem opposition[/QUOTE]
It's too small of a majority to affect a Con/Lab coalition vote.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.