back to article Labour calls for BIG OVERHAUL of UK super-snoop powers in 'new digital world'

The Labour Party is edging ever closer to plans to resurrect the twice-shelved reworking of existing surveillance laws to address security issues online, if it wins in next year's General Election. Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said during a speech today that the Labour Party backed reform that would allow spooks and …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    OVERHAUL

    read: MASSIVE EXTENSION of snooping powers. And PLEASE vote for us, because we PROMISE* to protect your children!

    p.s. don't mention the cost, the national debt is in freefall (or going stratospheric, depending on the take) anyway. And remember: THINK OF THE CHILDREN AND TERRORISTS. ONLY WE CAN PROTECT YOU!!!

    * if you REALLY think we're going to give you our full terms and conditions, go and have your head removed at the nearest walk-in centre.

    1. Joseph Lord
      Facepalm

      Re: OVERHAUL

      I would agree (possibly not the current intention but the likely outcome once back in power) but given the revelations about GCHQ I find it hard to imagine how they could possibly extend their snooping. Maybe it will allow the use of the results in court and to be shared more widely with the police and others.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: OVERHAUL

        "allow spooks and cops to do more to tackle paedophiles, extremists and terrorists who operate on the internet"

        I know I am only me, and the world is bigger than just me, but I have never seen any paedophile, extremist or terrorist activity on the internet. I am sure if I went looking for such I could probably find some, but then I could probably do the same thing if I actually went looking for them (not on the internet). So because I might be able to find some of those things in say a pub, should we ban all pubs and have guards on the doors and only allow people into the pub when accompanied by a government approved chaperone who will listen to and check everything they hear? Naturally, if the chaperone overhears someone telling you they are an extemist for example, then the extremist will be untouched but you will be arrested for hearing it.

        I do wish they wouldn't play childish politics with such an important issue as freedom.

        1. Euripides Pants
          Childcatcher

          Re: OVERHAUL

          "I have never seen any paedophile, extremist or terrorist activity on the internet"

          You're not squinting hard enough...

      2. HollyHopDrive

        Re: OVERHAUL

        "At one point, she noted that master NSA squealer Edward Snowden had damaged the image of national security by exposing the scale of surveillance being carried out by spooks on both sides of the Atlantic."

        You only look bad if you've acted bad. And this potential bill just looks to *try* and legitimise what you are doing anyway.

        I made a birthday cake for my wife. Nobody knows other than my family but if that leaked out - other than me looking a bit soft perhaps it doesn't make me out to be a bad bloke.

        If I'd setup a webcam to watch the "fit bird" [nice bit of 1970's sexism ;-) ] over the road and that leaked out everybody would think I was a dirty pervert. And that would be because I'd have acted like a pervert.

        If you don't want to make the national security look "bad" then make cakes. But you've been setting up webcams haven't you.[actually yahoo webcam sniffing ] Deal with it. Accept you've been caught and take your thoughts on snooping and stuick them so far up your own arse you can taste them.

      3. h4rm0ny

        Re: OVERHAUL

        Well New Labour led the way on demolishing privacy in the NHS. The "Spine", "Connecting for Health" and the rest was all their baby. So there's that whole area. Honestly, I thought I could smell hypocrisy when I opened the browser, and then I saw the headline.

        Seriously, there are few good reasons to vote Tory, but the Labour party is right there at the top of the list.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: OVERHAUL

          You think computers in the NHS are anything new? the Spine and CFH were replacing McKesson's systems (they took the piss when it came to quoting for a new system and thus were replaced)

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ClearNET

          1. h4rm0ny
            FAIL

            Re: OVERHAUL

            "You think computers in the NHS are anything new?"

            To quote a hero of mine: "Did IQ's just drop sharply while I was away?"

            I worked in the NHS for years so yes, I am aware there have been computers for a long time. The point is about the way New Labour started pulling data out of the surgeries and flinging it around in every direction without regard for privacy. CfH and the Spine aren't just computers in surgeries. They're programs of data extraction and circulation. Moron.

          2. This post has been deleted by its author

        2. John Smith 19 Gold badge
          Unhappy

          @h4rm0ny

          "ell New Labour led the way on demolishing privacy in the NHS. The "Spine", "Connecting for Health" and the rest was all their baby. So there's that whole area. Honestly, I thought I could smell hypocrisy when I opened the browser, and then I saw the headline."

          That being one of their less Orwellian plans.

          How quickly people forget the National Identity Register AKA the cradle-to-grave monitoring database.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: OVERHAUL

      Ah, how easily we forget.. It was New Labour who was at the heart of the most massive expansion of CCTV schemes in the nation. It was New Labour who actively collaborated with the US terrorist meme (for which we'll be paying for quite some time) and backdoored laws with terrorist exceptions. Under New Labour, RIPA turned "innocent until guilty" on its head by making non-disclosure of crypto keys a crime (all those who ever experimented with crypto, make sure you delete those test files - and make sure you have a good memory).

      Etc etc etc. Just because they make popular noises doesn't mean you can trust them. This is pure trolling for votes, and to me this is actually evidence that you must avoid them getting their claws on leadership again. Ever.

      1. Chris Parsons

        Re: OVERHAUL

        I think that says it all "how easily we forget". They introduced more legislation to restrict personal freedom than any peacetime government, ever. All politicians are to be distrusted, but Labour more than any of them. Sadly, there is no-one at all worthy of our votes any more.

        1. codejunky Silver badge

          Re: OVERHAUL

          @ Chris Parsons

          "Sadly, there is no-one at all worthy of our votes any more."

          We live in a democracy. If we have nobody worth voting for then get up. UKIP answered such a need between labour/tory middle and the extreme right (a position once held by tories). But there are many parties of varying positions to vote for.

          It is the idea that nobody is worth voting for and so we should do nothing that traps this country with people not worth voting for.

  2. Steve Todd

    Whenever politicians want to do something to infringe your liberties

    They invoke pedophiles and terrorists as the reason, but then write overarching powers into the bill that lets it be used for almost anything else they can think of. Given that most of them are lawyers you'd have thought they would be better at thinking through the potential of each clause they create ... or being cynical they know damned well what they are creating.

    1. RobHib
      Thumb Up

      @Steve Todd - - Re: Whenever politicians want to do something to infringe your liberties

      You're right, and it ought to be transparent to everyone but it won't be.

      Tragically, our democracies are at the mercy of this kind of hype and propaganda, and the more it succeeds the more they slide towards dictatorship.

      Why Labour always seems to be leading on this stuff is very troubling. Labour now reminds me of a caterpillar that's been parasitised by a wasp--what you see on the outside bears no resemblance to activities on the inside.

      'Trojan horse' is another description.

      1. h4rm0ny

        Re: @Steve Todd - - Whenever politicians want to do something to infringe your liberties

        >>"You're right, and it ought to be transparent to everyone but it won't be"

        It is pretty transparent, but few politicians have found a good way of replying "but I don't agree" without sounding weak or tolerant of Evil(tm) when their opponent plays the terrorist-paedophile card.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Whenever politicians want to do something to infringe your liberties

      Given that most of them are lawyers you'd have thought they would be better at thinking through the potential of each clause they create ... or being cynical they know damned well what they are creating.

      As far as I recall (I'm trying to forget this lamentable period), the leader of those crooks had to create his own private bank to handle all the loot he dragged out of it...

  3. MJI Silver badge

    I bet most discussions between

    terrorists are face to face or dead drop and do not involve the internet.

    Sounds like usual control freak scaremongering

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I bet most discussions between

      I am given to understand by a 'reputable' source that when they picked up one significant terrorist he was on his webcam - apparently terrorists dent trust anyone if they can not see them....

      1. Vic

        Re: I bet most discussions between

        I am given to understand by a 'reputable' source that when they picked up one significant terrorist he was on his webcam

        An anecdote from an AC on the Internet?

        Well, that's me convinced.

        Vic.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: I bet most discussions between

          An anecdote from an AC on the Internet?

          Well, that's me convinced.

          You could always Google it. But that requires you to trust Google to serve up the right data and not something that they have been told to prioritise by US government, just in case you were thinking that wasn't happening...

    2. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: I bet most discussions between

      Depends which kind of terrorists.

      IRA / Al Queda kind of terrorists probably don't use Yahoo chat

      Terrorist campaigners against hospital closures, anti-fuel tax, pro/anti badger killing and people who have the temerity to join a union - probably do use webcams

  4. dervheid

    So, the party of a bazillion CCTV cameras...

    now wants tighter controls on scumvermental snooping?

    Yeah.

    Right.

    *Checks back of head for presence of zip/buttons*

  5. Captain Hogwash

    The Power Of Nightmares

    That is all.

  6. Ted Treen
    Big Brother

    "...do more to tackle paedophiles, extremists and terrorists who operate on the internet..."

    And as a byproduct, keep tabs on anyone else who happens to use the internet.

    A pox on them all, and a plague on all their houses.

  7. Version 1.0 Silver badge

    What's the cost benefit?

    There's always going to be some snooping going on, I can accept that - I don't like it, but I understand the rational for it and politicians being the weak-kneed bastards that they are, it's inevitable.

    But what doesn't make any sense is the secrecy - if the aim is to prevent terrorists and pediatricians ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H pedophiles from injuring our society then why keep it secret? Wouldn't we all be safer if they knew that they would be caught if they tried anything? With the current scenario, what cost it cost to catch anyone in the categories that they are looking for?

    Dr. Strangelove: Of course, the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost, if you *keep* it a *secret*! Why didn't you tell the world, EH?

    You can't defeat terrorists by blowing up terrorists, that just creates more terrorists - you defeat terrorists by dealing with the root causes of terrorism. And pedophiles et al wouldn't exist if our society was more open to sexually positive experiences.

    1. John Smith 19 Gold badge

      Re: What's the cost benefit?

      "You can't defeat terrorists by blowing up terrorists, that just creates more terrorists - you defeat terrorists by dealing with the root causes of terrorism. And pedophiles et al wouldn't exist if our society was more open to sexually positive experiences."

      True.

      But.

      What makes you think this actually has anything to do with either catching paedophiles, terrorists, paedoterrorists or terrorpaedos.

      This is the usual "coalition of the willing" between "gone native," usually authoritarian Ministers (or wannabe Ministers) and various data fetishist civil servants wanting to get their paws on more and more personal data.

    2. h4rm0ny

      Re: What's the cost benefit?

      >>"And pedophiles et al wouldn't exist if our society was more open to sexually positive experiences."

      Downvote for this piece of stupidity that you ended an otherwise okay post with. Attraction to pre-puberty children you think is a result of society being too sexual repressed? Or you think the perception of attraction to little kids as a problem is the result of society being closed minded? Either way, that's wrong and fucked up.

  8. Dunstan Vavasour

    Sharks

    Any discussion about surveillance powers should be conducted with the participants sitting above a shark pool, and anyone who uses the words "it is not our intention to..." should be tipped in. It was not the intention of RIPA that councils would snoop on domestic bin usage, but it granted them those powers.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Sharks

      Why not make anyone who votes for more intrusion directly subject to that law for a year? Personally, I think a bit more personal involvement would do that lot a world of good.

      Let's have a webcam on that shadow minister. Let Glassholes be automatically enabled when they are in that person's vicinity. Let's have every bit of CCTV foortage of that person be publicly accessible. It might make them more honest too, although I suspect that that is a lost cause.

  9. All names Taken
    Paris Hilton

    Dear Labour Party

    Just ask the Germans.

    They, the country and its citizens I mean, seem to be doing very well indeed - going from strength to strength.

    On the other hand here in the UK ... well, 'nuff said?

  10. jason 7

    Okay so this will work like the last election.

    Pre Election

    Insert any Party name here - "Oh this is terrible! If you vote for us we will get rid of this draconian legislation!"

    Post Election

    Insert any Party name here - "Thanks for putting us in Government, hmm actually that draconian legislation looks very sensible now, in fact we think it doesn't go far enough!"

    C'mon people at the next election do the decent thing and "Vote for anyone but the incumbent" that way we vote the lot of them out just to show who really holds the power of democracy.

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: Okay so this will work like the last election.

      Erm... it is the opposition that is proposing this

      1. jason 7

        Re: Okay so this will work like the last election.

        Yes do you not remember the Conservartives stating that they were against a load of extra anti-privacy/legal/interrogation laws that Labour wanted to bring in.

        Even put it in their manifesto.

        Then after they were elected...they conveniently forgot all about it.

        The Conservatives don't care either. This is Labour trying to win back the corporate overlords to ressure them they are for their agenda.

    2. Trainee grumpy old ****

      Re: Okay so this will work like the last election.

      All the main-stream political parties are as bad as each other. Vote Monster Raving Loony - you know it makes sense.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Labour F.U.D

    Why don't they just go the whole hog and have every electronic communication filtered by GCHQ .. oh they already do that ! ... New Labour .. New Gestapo !

  12. bigtimehustler

    Hmm, did they completely miss the outrage about the snooping already going on? I mean, i know why they would want snooping but surely trying to sell it as a way to get into power is a little silly? It only takes one party to take the other stance to expose how crazy it is.

    1. codejunky Silver badge

      Outrage

      What outrage? In the US they have noticed because they have a harder time selling their storage services and hardware. Has the UK noticed? Who has raised a fuss?

      In the UK I hear of those in the US kicking up a fuss. Thats where it ends unfortunately.

      1. Alister

        Re: Outrage

        I don't know why you got downvoted for that, you are absolutely correct, in the UK, other than a few commentards, there has been very little fuss, and most of the media have actively pushed the party line - surveillance is good for you. As far as the man in the street is concerned there is no story, no problem.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Outrage

          I guess it'd be helpful if everyone who does whinge here and elsewhere made sure they supported one or more of the various organisations such as the Open Rights Group or Electronic Frontier Foundation (perhaps even the Free Software Foundation) who try their best to fight the current craze, with monthly donations that vaguely reflect the importance they claim this has to them.

          Wasn't it Lawrence Lessig who suggested donating in sum an amount similar to what you pay for your broadband to the EFF and/or others? That's what I do. Please join us (any non-zero amount is fine).

  13. Amorous Cowherder
    Facepalm

    "The police and security services have been under pressure to explain why they didn’t know more about the murderers of Drummer Lee Rigby, and why more is not being done to disrupt the use of the internet by violent extremists looking to radicalise young people," the MP said.

    Errmm, because if you're planning to do something so utterly nasty, even the biggest nutter is unlikely to write a post on his Twitter feed along the lines of...

    "Go get me som vengnce on uk army boyz! YOLO! ;-)"

    FFS! Just 'cos MPs spend 99% of their day glued to their personal Twitter/Facebook feeds the rest of us don't. The nutters planning psychotic acts are probably pretty unlikely to make a song and dance about it just in case, oh dunno, the Plod or the security services pick up on it?!!

    1. xerocred

      but didn't MI5/6 know about Lee Rigby's killers already? Didn't someone claim that MI5/6 try to recruit (one of them at least) as snitches on his return from (and arrest in) kenya

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Yes, they absolutely already knew. Typical Labour bullshit (same as Tory bullshit only painted red)

  14. Nevermind
    Big Brother

    Surveillance State

    Would you like an ID card with that Yvette?

  15. Mike Smith
    FAIL

    Sigh

    I've been racking my brains trying to think up something relevant that doesn't involve pejorative comparisons with the likes of Ceausescu's Romania or Communist East Germany and doesn't combine wishful thinking, ropes and lamp posts. And I haven't managed it.

    Labour can bang on all they like about being the cool, egalitarian people's party who want to share the wealth and bash the rich, but behind that crap are some thoroughly dangerous little fascisti who think that because they've blustered their way into the House of Commons they actually know what they're talking about. Their utter ignorance just adds to the level of menace they present.

    The architects of the nanny state caring about our privacy. That's not even vaguely funny. And wanting to follow the lead of the USA with its out-of-control NSA snooping on all and sundry.. epic bloody fail, and no mistake.

    1. Anomalous Cowturd
      Stop

      Re: Sigh

      Mike.

      I think you'll find that the Americans follow OUR lead in the snooping on all and sundry game.

      The United Kingdom. Leading the world...

      ...Down the shitter.

  16. Martin Gregorie

    We need three legal fixes (OK, four)

    1) Restrict GCHQ to operating OUTSIDE the UK and heavy fines/firings for transgressions.

    2) A separate organisation to handle all the UK's internal letter opening/wire tapping/Internet snooping duties and a requirement for legally issued warrants. Counterbalanced with heavy fines/firings for any warrantless snooping.

    3) A huge fine for anybody, especially journalists, using the term 'paedophile' when they actually mean 'child molester'. Tell it like it is FFS.

    4) Rewrite RIPA to severely limit the people who can use it or, better yet, scrap it entirely as unfit for (any) purpose.

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: We need three legal fixes (OK, four)

      2, We already do, MI5, National criminal intelligence unit, Special Reconnaissance Unit, Special branch etc etc

    2. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Unhappy

      @Martin Gregorie

      "4) Rewrite RIPA to severely limit the people who can use it or, better yet, scrap it entirely as unfit for (any) purpose."

      Actually RIPA is the only UK law that puts any limits on govt behavior.

      But it needs a hell of a lot of work to put any serious limits on "national security" "needs."

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: We need three legal fixes (OK, four)

      5) ensure transparancy and independent supervision (and although I don't have that much trust in the average citizen, a few drawn in every year to report back would be good too as trustworthy independence is hard to find). Any attempt to label something as National Security to escape scrutiny must be examined. I appreciate that some of it is real, but the current volume suggest that a lot of it isn't, and that urgently needs to see daylight.

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Yvette cooper

    highly authoritarian and not to be trusted

  18. nsld
    FAIL

    More of the same drivel

    "The police and security services have been under pressure to explain why they didn’t know more about the murderers of Drummer Lee Rigby, and why more is not being done to disrupt the use of the internet by violent extremists looking to radicalise young people," the MP said.

    Funnily enough Treasonous May said the same thing just before Snowden threw her under the bus with the revelations that GCHQ where already doing that and much more with no legal oversight.

    The bottom line is that this is nothing more than the cynical use of the death of Lee Rigby and both May and Cooper should be ashamed of themselves, especially after it came to light that both of the scum bags who carried out the hideous crime where extremely well know to the security services.

    Despite what these idiots will have you believe we are not over run with terrorists or paedophiles but they do make great headline grabbers. If Cooper wants to do something to get votes she needs to overturn the deals done by Blair with the murdering IRA scum so that they can be bought to justice rather than her dreams of her own personal great firewall of UK.

    1. Anomalous Cowturd
      Pint

      Re: More of the same drivel

      +1 for Treasonous May.

      And +another 1 for the rest.

    2. This post has been deleted by its author

    3. xerocred

      Re: More of the same drivel

      Welcome to Dystopia. Oh, you're already here.

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Pretty sure the politicians and most of the population dumped the concept of "liberty" a long time ago.

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Mushroom

    I really do wish the politicians would stop banging on about paedophiles. I couldn't really give a shit about people that look at pictures as long as they keep their hands to themselves.

    All these paedophile soundbites are just a smokescreen for the real problem of the abduction of children and forcing them into sexual slavery.

    But then that's a really difficult problem to solve, with much of it being perpetrated in foreign lands.

    1. JonP

      I couldn't really give a shit about people that look at pictures as long as they keep their hands to themselves.

      The problem is that the pictures are only taken (and hence children abused) because people want to look at them. It's not a smokescreen for the real problem, it's the cause of the real problem - in much the same way that the demand for ivory or tiger bones is the cause of the poaching. If there was no demand it wouldn't make any money, and so wouldn't happen. But, yes it's a global problem and more local laws aren't really going to make much difference...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        I actually disagree. I've heard this argument before and it's flawed.

        The problem with this kind of logic is that what would otherwise be perfectly legitimate behaviour (looking at pictures) becomes criminalised, withtout even getting into the boundary conditions of the popular traditions of Japanese anime and cartoons of what look to be "children".

        The problem that society has is the abuse of children, not the viewing of pictures. Our obsession with pictures makes us think we're doing something noble while doing very little to actually deal with the problem.

        By focusing on this, we lose sight of what the real problem is and fail to deal with it.

        As we can see in this case, clamping down on paedophiles looking at pictures has made not one jot of difference to the problem of child sexual abuse because it just doesn't get to the gist of the problem at hand.

        One reason for this is that is is much harder to detect people looking at pictures than it is to detect child abduction and abuse, despite the enormous amount of money and effort being pored into it.

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Big Brother

    If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Labour introduced much of the powers that need reforming.

  23. Will Godfrey Silver badge

    I dispair

    Is there no end to their lies, deceit, arrogance and ignorance?

    1. billse10

      Re: I dispair

      "Is there no end to their lies, deceit, arrogance and ignorance?"

      Conversely:

      Is there no beginning to their honesty and competence?

  24. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Unhappy

    You wonder if any of them have read Snowden's details and realize

    most of what they want already exists.

  25. Jamie Jones Silver badge
    Thumb Up

    Where are the American commentards?

    I've just had a thought.

    No doubt you've seen the reoccurring theme from some American commentators in the NSA threads accusing us Brits of biased American-bashing, even though (as many have pointed out) the complaints have been related to the American situation, simply because the majority of articles are about the NSA.

    And then the strange reaction when the Yahoo webcam GCHQ story was released and it was almost like "ner ner, yours are bad too", and we were "errr, yeah, and? it's not a competition. Feel free to rip into them as we will"

    Well, here is an article about scummy UK stuff, and every post so far has been critical of both/either parties, but the Americans seem to be strangely quiet.

    To be fair, there are some anti-American arsehats on here, but could the more general feeling of anti-American bias simply be because those that feel it simply aren't interested in UK related articles, and therefore don't get to read these types of comments?

    I hope not. I was looking forward to opinions from our American friends (as long as they aren't of the 'one-up-manship' type that some think has been our agenda)

    Seriously, I think some of the best commentards on El Reg are American, and it's nice to see a group that doesn't fall into the 'we kick yer ass, America #1 fuck yeah!" stereotype.

    I'd like to hope both Yanks and Limeys alike can continue to post an opinion here on things that are USA-related, or UK-related, without things turning into an us..vs..them / anti-US/UK accusational (Does that word exist? It should do!)

    In fact, El Reg has been one of the few places I've seen on the net where this has been the case. I hope this continues.

    Sorry, I've gone off on a big touchie-feelie hippy tangent, ho hum. I blame the meds!

    P.s. Of course, the same applies to all other countries too, but problems mainly seem to appear when its UK <-> US

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Where are the American commentards?

      "accusational (Does that word exist? It should do"

      If you were American you'd probably call it an accusationalism-fest" :-)

      1. h4rm0ny

        Re: Where are the American commentards?

        You're both looking for the word 'accusatory'.

    2. wx666z
      Big Brother

      Re: Where are the American commentards?

      As a citizen of the U.S., I'm appalled that both the U.K. and the U.S. seem to be on the same trajectory, a speeding freight train on rails laid long ago. No matter the engineer/driver, our course is pre-determined.Not sure about the U.K., but have decided here I can no longer vote Democrat or Republican, have voted Green several times. We did not win, and perhaps never will. Just don't play within the system.

      1. Jamie Jones Silver badge
        Unhappy

        Re: Where are the American commentards?

        " As a citizen of the U.S., I'm appalled that both the U.K. and the U.S. seem to be on the same trajectory"

        I agree totally. As this article shows, here in the UK, the main parties are also as bad as each other.

        The people (or 'sheeple' to use the paragraphically-challenged-ones silly word) such *as* Matt believe any of the "there's a paedophile/terrorist/welshman' hiding under your bed" stories, and are willing to throw away their freedom, as long as it doesn't affect their ability to vote on programmes such as (ironically) 'Big Brother'.

        I'm more surprised that it's happening here, though, as the WWII bombing stuff and the domestic terrorism have been a factor in our history. I guess people forget, and youth grow up without ever knowing or caring.

        The main problem that people like Matt don't see is the insidiousness of the whole operation: Laying the legal and technical infrastructure to make mission creep almost inevitable.

        As someone has already pointed out, soon, any group planning a peaceful protest will be considered 'terrorists'.

        People will be investigated due to jokes or misconstrued comments supposedly made in private - thought-crime will become a real issue, just as the book predicted.

        In the past, if the police had wanted to listen in on someones communications, the word 'warrant' was always expected to be part of the picture, but it seems the spies live on a James Bond pedestal....

  26. Graham Marsden
    Big Brother

    "paedophiles, extremists and terrorists... oh my!"

    These are the people who gave us the Dangerous Pictures Act. Who wanted the National DNA Database. Who wanted us all to have ID cards. Who introduced the RIP Act which was supposed to protect us against terrorists, not to spy on people who might be sending their kids to the wrong school, etc etc etc.

    And NOW they expect us to TRUST THEM?

    1. Jamie Jones Silver badge
      Joke

      Re: "paedophiles, extremists and terrorists... oh my!"

      Graham, spoken like a true extremely perverted terrorist!

      I suggest Gitmo for you forthwith!

  27. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Politicians

    You'll always know when they're lying: their lips move.

  28. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    Pathetic is as pathetic does ....

    ... and one does wonder why such nonsense is tolerated of minnows and minions and afforded column inches and aired in timed spaces/contrived places. Media is such an ignorant plonker and so easily led to the bottom of piles of smarter news and clearer views.

    Ok ..... what is the consensus El Reg view with particular and peculiar regard to any proposed political theatre that would have government lackeys and under and uneducated peoples representatives thinking to provide intelligence services with a revised mandate to be overseen by them/dictated by them?

    Would the spooks be quaking in their boots at the prospect, or laughing their merry little heads off at the hubris?

    Vote up for rousing laughter, vote down for them being terrified with worrisome FUD.

    And would it be entirely appropriate for spooky chiefs to grow a pair, and advise the above and aforementioned government lackeys and under and uneducated peoples representatives, on behalf of and as media spokespersons for their intelligence services, to fcuk off and mind their own dodgy mined business whilst they still can before the bold early knock at the door because of what has been discovered about their shenanigans, or is that best left unsaid for us to enjoy as new tales in the news in the upcoming series of fab revisionary actions with novel noble revelations in sweet sticky juicy scandals?

    How about introducing the/a more chaotic dimension there, and launch both scenarios at the same time, to present something different and engaging and confusing and as stealthy as a bloodless background intelligence coup which does not accept fools as tools in high office and totally unfit and unsuitable for future great game purpose.

    Up for yes, down for no ... :-)

  29. Anonymous Coward
    Black Helicopters

    "Yet all raise the same fundamental questions about how we sustain both liberty and security..."

    "So we've decided to ditch the liberty part. Vote Labour!! After all, we'll know how you filled your ballot out!!"

    1. Mike Smith
      Big Brother

      Re: "Yet all raise the same fundamental questions about how we sustain both liberty and security..."

      I do wish you hadn't said that. I wouldn't put it past the LaborPartei to float legislation that would allow the security services to open ballot boxes at will to help them find $BOGEYMAN.

      In fact, I'm not sure what I find scarier - whether they might do that, or the fact that it wouldn't surprise me if they did.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: "Yet all raise the same fundamental questions about how we sustain both liberty and security..."

        "In fact, I'm not sure what I find scarier - whether they might do that, or the fact that it wouldn't surprise me if they did."

        There are early signs they are learning the skills.

  30. Roj Blake Silver badge

    And to think that my hatred of the Tories almost had me backing Labour.

    Thanks for confirming that Labour hasn't changed after all, Ms Cooper.

  31. Bernard M. Orwell

    Translation

    "At one point, she noted that master NSA squealer* Edward Snowden had damaged the image of national security by exposing the scale of surveillance being carried out by spooks on both sides of the Atlantic."

    Translation: "Oh god! We got caught! We're sorry we got caught! We'll make sure we don't get caught again! It was so bad of us to get caught! We look soooo bad because we got caught!"

    *I doubt the minister used the word "squealer". I suspect that someone else applied that particularly choice term for some other, unbeknown reason.

    1. Smarty Pants

      Re: Translation

      Or Translation: "Oh god! We got caught! We're sorry we got caught! We'll make sure we don't get caught again! It was so bad of us to get caught! We look soooo bad because we got caught!"

      So what we will do is change the rules so what we got caught for is no longer wrong therefore we cannot be 'caught' for doing it as it is legal now.

  32. earl grey
    Trollface

    Well, at least we know it will never be misused

    what could possibly go wrong?

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like