andygardener Posted April 1, 2012 Share Posted April 1, 2012 I can see in rapidy moving circumstances (like the french jihadi going beserk recently) the benefits of GCHQ being able to rapidly build realtime maps of who is talking to who and who they have been talking to in order to triangulate possible suspects rapidly seem sensible. If the legislation is restricted to GCHQ and not rolled out as a general police power then I would broadly support it, I'd have to see the detail though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted April 1, 2012 Share Posted April 1, 2012 I was completely against the ID card fiasco so beloved by the last lot and this smacks of being worse. David Davies has it about right. "an unnecessary extension of the ability of the state to snoop on ordinary people". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mafya Posted April 1, 2012 Share Posted April 1, 2012 I can see in rapidy moving circumstances (like the french jihadi going beserk recently) the benefits of GCHQ being able to rapidly build realtime maps of who is talking to who and who they have been talking to in order to triangulate possible suspects rapidly seem sensible. If the legislation is restricted to GCHQ and not rolled out as a general police power then I would broadly support it, I'd have to see the detail though. My Bold= They can already do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted April 1, 2012 Share Posted April 1, 2012 Privacy? If any one wants that, they are going to have to stop communicating! Sadly experienced terrorists worked this out some time ago. That is one weak area of the proposal, most actual terrorsts don't send emails, they use multiple free online email services and just write draft messages on accounts which then get accessed by their accomplices and reply overwritten, so on and so forth. None of which would be picked up by what is proposed if they maintain discipline and never send. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted April 1, 2012 Share Posted April 1, 2012 My Bold= They can already do this. I think that what is being proposed differs from what exists in that currently GCHQ can demand historical records and updates, the proposal would require ISPs and telcos to have suitable linkage to GCHQ so that when an order is given they get full realtime visability of the various accounts. I think it's more about a technical upgrade than a change of policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted April 1, 2012 Share Posted April 1, 2012 Before you get too worked up about it, check the date of the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alky Posted April 1, 2012 Share Posted April 1, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17576745?ref=nf Arrrggghhhh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted April 1, 2012 Share Posted April 1, 2012 ...George Orwell 1987 Book is coming soo sooo true 1987? Are you sure that's not a book by his brother, River Orwell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ sheffield Posted April 1, 2012 Share Posted April 1, 2012 Nowt to hide, nowt to worry about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted April 1, 2012 Share Posted April 1, 2012 Completely unnecessary overkill imo. If this is a anti-terrorism specific measure, surely monitoring everybody makes it harder for the security services to wade through the amassed data (think needle in haystack) rather tha targetted surveillance. The cost will be immense, but for how much benefit? How do we know the data will be secure, won't be hacked, leaked, sold, or otherwise misused? Probably the worst thing since RIPA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.