Get outraged at something important - state spying on us

#1
If you want to get outraged, try this for a real horror story and Big Brother State:

Telegraph

All telecoms companies and internet service providers will be required by law to keep a record of every customer’s personal communications, showing who they have contacted, when and where, as well as the websites they have visited.

Despite widespread opposition to the increasing amount of surveillance in Britain, 653 public bodies will be given access to the information, including police, local councils, the Financial Services Authority, the ambulance service, fire authorities and even prison governors.

They will not require the permission of a judge or a magistrate to obtain the information, but simply the authorisation of a senior police officer or the equivalent of a deputy head of department at a local authority.

Ministers had originally wanted to store the information on a single government-run database, but chose not to because of privacy concerns.

However the Government announced yesterday it was pressing ahead with privately held “Big Brother” databases that opposition leaders said amounted to “state-spying” and a form of “covert surveillance” on the public.

It is doing so despite its own consultation showing that it has little public support.

The Home Office admitted that only one third of respondents to its six-month consultation on the issue supported its proposals, with 50 per cent fearing that the scheme lacked sufficient safeguards to protect the highly personal data from abuse.

:x
 
#2
In a modern way we are going to be in the near future, more serf-like than at any time since the middle ages.
Except in times of national emergency [ie., World War] we as a nation have never been so controlled by elected and unelected entities. We really are sleepwalking into a 1984 scenario.
 
#3
I am beginning to think that we need another few years of Labour to stir this lethargic nation into significant protest about many aspects of government. To my chagrin, I think I have to write that we need to become 'more French' and remind our leaders that they work for us, not vice versa.
This legislation will go through and the greatest busybodies (local authority staff) will be doing vital prying into our private lives. The public will be watching X factor instead of endetta.
 
#5
Mr_C_Hinecap said:
If you want to get outraged, try this for a real horror story and Big Brother State:

Telegraph

All telecoms companies and internet service providers will be required by law to keep a record of every customer’s personal communications, showing who they have contacted, when and where, as well as the websites they have visited.

Despite widespread opposition to the increasing amount of surveillance in Britain, 653 public bodies will be given access to the information, including police, local councils, the Financial Services Authority, the ambulance service, fire authorities and even prison governors.

They will not require the permission of a judge or a magistrate to obtain the information, but simply the authorisation of a senior police officer or the equivalent of a deputy head of department at a local authority.

Ministers had originally wanted to store the information on a single government-run database, but chose not to because of privacy concerns.

However the Government announced yesterday it was pressing ahead with privately held “Big Brother” databases that opposition leaders said amounted to “state-spying” and a form of “covert surveillance” on the public.

It is doing so despite its own consultation showing that it has little public support.

The Home Office admitted that only one third of respondents to its six-month consultation on the issue supported its proposals, with 50 per cent fearing that the scheme lacked sufficient safeguards to protect the highly personal data from abuse.

:x
On the other hand:

Ministers cancel 'Big Brother' database

Plans to store information about every phone call, email and internet visit in the United Kingdom have in effect been abandoned by the Government.

The Home Office confirmed the "Big Brother" scheme had been delayed until after the election amid protests that it would be intrusive and open to abuse. Although ministers publicly insisted yesterday that they remained committed to the scheme, they have decided not to include the contentious measure in next week's Queen's Speech, the Government's final legislative programme before the election.

The effect of this move could be to kill off the plans for years. The Conservatives have not ruled out reviving the idea but remain sceptical about the practicality of Labour's proposals.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-database-cancelled-by-ministers-1817708.html
 
#7
DigitalGeek said:
And who is going to analyse all of the collected traffic? It would be like the Stasi in the old DDR, shitloads of info but absolutely irrelevant.

Ding Ding!
The Stasi didn't have the benefit of modern automated technology that triggers on detecting specific attributes.
 
#9
Dunservin said:
DigitalGeek said:
And who is going to analyse all of the collected traffic? It would be like the Stasi in the old DDR, shitloads of info but absolutely irrelevant.

Ding Ding!
The Stasi didn't have the benefit of modern automated technology that triggers on detecting specific attributes.
Is that "modern" automated technology of the same ilk as DII or JPA? In that case we'll all be safe! :lol:
 
#10
I have to hand it to them, they really are quite clever. This is the 'signal' that I see when I read between the lines.
We give you 2 choices
1) War in Afghanistan where all the worlds terrorists gather to train and gain experience. If you want this it will cost a fortune and there will be something on the news every nights about some bloke who has been killed or some ex general who is speaking out. This could go on for a generation.
2) Leave Afghanistan and all that comes with it, we will 'fight' terrorism where it matters, at home, where it affects you. Of course this means that we will need some extra powers, but nothing comes for free. It wont affect you day to day, only those with something to hide will need to worry. It will all happen behind the scenes, but it is neccessary. And the News will not have the bloody armed forces on it every night, instead you can go back to X Factor, East Enders and which footie team is hiring and firing- that is what you want isnt it?

Or am I being too cynical?
 
#11
Tango said:
ashie said:
The Home Office confirmed the "Big Brother" scheme had been delayed until after the election
My bold.
And mine...

The Conservatives have not ruled out reviving the idea but remain sceptical about the practicality of Labour's proposals.
There are far more serious issues than the one of practicality. People use the Internet to chat privately with friends and family, argue with the missis, shop, work, look at porn, consult a doctor and about a million other things which should be of no interest to the Government.

People use the Internet for so many things nowadays, that these proposals are akin to putting every person in the country under 24/7 surveillance.

To tell ISPs to keep this data is scary. To provide easy access to hundreds of plastic agencies is even scarier. And what's worse is this is just a stepping stone towards the searchable, centralised database.

Handing the Government that much control over the everyday lives of its citizens is extremely worrying. This policy needs a kick in the cnut before we find ourselves arrested for posting on sites like this, or profiled and put on watchlists for voting the wrong way...
 
#12
Despite widespread opposition to the increasing amount of surveillance in Britain, 653 public bodies will be given access to the information, including police, local councils, the Financial Services Authority, the ambulance service, fire authorities and even prison governors.
And what the fcuk do the fire service, ambulance service, local council and FSA want the data!?
 
#13
Because they can. They are agents of the ZaNuLabour State thus they must have access to every single bit of information about the "people" they can get their hands on.

Remember it is for your own comfort and security and that if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
 
#14
Some of the agencies I concede might have a need to access this data. The police, for example, have a semi-valid reason to require access to someone's internet data. However, the fire service, prison governors, ambulance workers?
 
#16
Tango makes a good point. Valid law-enforcement agencies should have access to the data, if they can obtain a warrant. But WTF do my council need this stuff for?
 
#18
Magdovus said:
Tango makes a good point. Valid law-enforcement agencies should have access to the data, if they can obtain a warrant. But WTF do my council need this stuff for?
Exactly. The process for accessing this information should be the same process which would need to be followed if a suspects phone was tapped.
 
#19
My god - this is terrifying. You mean that there may be other people in Britain who are spying on me flicking between the Socialist Workers Party website and 2girls1cup.com? Reading my emails to the missus asking whether we are having fcuking cous cous again tonight? Adding that with my banal, pointless and generally irritating posts on Arrse? Seeing that my Itunes collection includes both June Carter Cash and Carter USM? Putting that all together and locking me up for crimes against 'umanity?

Panic! Panic! Panic!


Or you could stop worrying you bunch of throbbers with your 1984 fantasies and how they are watching you. Here's a clue - you live a really small, dull, uninteresting, unimportant fcuking life. They really don't give a sh1t how many fake viagra and blow up Maggie Thatcher dolls you buy.
 
#20
Calm down,Calm down.....Now all this talk about the government being a Stasi clone and allowing 653 seperate agencies of the Realm having access to every single communiction that you or your household does,is nothing to really worry about about.

Think on this for a moment......Its not as if we have a government that was inept and filled with unqualified persons who had been found guilty by the public of mass fraud for example,but have twisted and made their own rules to effectively escape justice....

......Its not as if our government do not have our best interests at heart,just think back over the last 12 years at all the beautiful human rights projects that they have brought in.....

.....You cannot even say that our National security is at risk due to persons unknown breaching our borders,or people who until a couple of decades ago were communist party members and now in government.....


...Again you cannot even say that the government has a bad record when it comes to the fair application of the law..security of data...and the appropiate use of laws....

If It was otherwise I might worry....but its not,we are well managed by honest/truthful and honourable people.























You have no idea how much mental anguish I went through to type that sarcastic post and go against my own thinking for the search of humour.