Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

UK: Woolwich attack sparks Labour calls for snooper’s charter

Press TV – May 23, 2013

Labour peers have urged British Deputy Prime Minister and Lib-Dems leader Nick Clegg to stop opposing the Communications Data Bill, dubbed the snooper’s charter by the opponents, in the wake of the Woolwich attack.

Former Labour home secretary Lord Reid and former security minister Lord West urged Clegg to drop his opposition to the legislation after a soldier was beheaded by the knife-wielding attackers in Woolwich, southeast London.

Appearing on BBC’s Newsnight, Lord Reid said the police and intelligence services should have tools they need to prevent these kinds of attacks.

Privacy watchdog Big Brother Watch, however, said it was “wholly wrong for [Lord Reid] to be arguing for a change of policy before the details of what has happened in Woolwich are clear.”

The snooper’s charter, if passed, would allow bulk, warrantless, unaccountable examination of all online activities by government agencies in the country, which according to critics would harm Britons’ freedom and privacy.

The so-called snooper’s charter was proposed by Home Secretary Theresa May, despite the coalition government’s agreement in 2010 to end the storing of emails and Internet records “without good reason”.

Related article

May 24, 2013 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

UK: Lib Dems hollow promise on snooping

Press TV – April 9, 2012

In yet another of British Liberal Democrats’ face-saving comments on the government’s proposed snooping laws, the party’s president has pledged to “kill” the bill.

Tim Farron said the Lib Dems “are prepared to kill” the controversial plans but watered down his tough rhetoric saying that will happen if the proposed changes, by their senior coalition partners in the Conservative party, become a “threat to a free and liberal society.”

“But we are prepared to kill them [the plans], be absolutely clear about that, if it comes down to it,” Farron told BBC.

“If we think this is a threat to a free and liberal society then there would be no question of unpicking them or compromising, this just simply must not happen.”

The new legislation proposed by the Home Office will give security services unrestricted access on demand to all web usage, emails, chat logs and telephone calls of any individual.

Lib Dem Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said earlier this month that the government is only to publish the plans “in draft” to ensure the changes face a lengthy delay that would open space for further debate on the details of the legislation.

His stance was crucial to save the face of the party, which opposed similar legislation tabled by the former Labour administration when Lib Dems were in the opposition.

It even triggered civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch to welcome a “draft bill” as a “significant climbdown” on the matter.

However, Home Secretary Theresa May undermined Clegg’s comments saying, “I would expect us to be able to do this in a Bill in the next session [of parliament],” that is by the next month.

In the context of May’s remarks, Farron’s talk of Lib Dems killing the bill seems another hollow promise to both please Lib Dem supporters and leave space for the government to push ahead with its snooping wishes.

After all, Farron did make it clear that he sees the “need” to give security services wider control power over the digital world.

“I am prepared to recognise that there is obviously a need in modern society with new technology to have a look at what needs to be given to the security services, but only if it is absolutely clear there is no universal access,” he said.

Farron further cemented the point that Lib Dems’ opposition to the bill will not be unconditional saying they will oppose it only “if we think this is a threat to a free and liberal society.”

He did not explain what exactly constitutes a “free and liberal society.”

He also did not clarify whether Lib Dems will define such a society with the same commitment to liberal principles that they exercised when going back on their election pledge to keep university tuition fees unchanged.

April 9, 2012 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

Brits to pay $3 bln to be spied upon on web, emails, texts

RT | 03 April, 2012

UK taxpayers will have to pay billions of dollars to have their web surfing, email exchange, text messaging, and even Skype calls, monitored. In addition to the hefty price-tag, innocent Brits risk being misidentified as terrorists.

The shocking data comes ahead of the plan announcement in the Queen’s speech, which is scheduled for May. Meanwhile, the Home Office, Britain’s interior ministry, said ministers were preparing to legislate “as soon as parliamentary time allows”.

More than $3 billion over the first decade alone is the extraordinary sum the British taxpayer will have to pay to be legally spied upon, reports the Daily Mail. In addition, annual running costs of roughly $320 million – $610 a minute – to store the data gathered from private communication.

Moreover, the above figures are based on 2009 estimates, which means the actual price, if it were estimated now, would be higher still.

British security agencies are pushing for a law, which would allow police to gain access to who you call, what sites you surf and how you play video games.

The government wants details about text messages, phone calls, email, visited websites, Facebook and Twitter exchanges and even online game chats.

The bill is aimed at finding potential terrorists and criminals in the name of protecting British citizens. However, Brits themselves might need protection from the side-effects caused by the new policy. According to the Information Commissioner’s Office – an independent watchdog upholding information rights in the public interest – once implemented, the bill may lead to innocents being wrongly identified as criminals. Or worse still – terrorists.

According to ICO internal documents uncovered by Tory MP Dominic Raab, this misidentification may lead to regular people being barred from flying along with terrorist suspects and criminals alike.

“Individuals may be wrongly identified, subject to identity fraud or there may just be a mistake. How do they put this right? Intelligence can be used to put people on no-fly lists, limit incomes or asset grabs by government agencies,” the documents read.

Rights activists fear potential abuse of the surveillance, as well as hacker threats to the database storing the personal details collected. It will be a responsibility of providers to store the data for two years. ICO documents cover this sensitive subject too, warning of the potential for abuse by service providers.

These revelations have caused an upheaval among British politicians, with both Tories and Liberal Democrats standing their ground as opponents of the policy, which was first suggested by the Labour government back in 2006. Six years on, MPs are raising their brows at the estimated cost of the project, in the wake of financial hardships that push UK government to make cuts elsewhere.

The plan is said to have been prepared by the Home Office in collaboration with home security service MI5, the foreign intelligence service MI6 and the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), the body responsible for signals intelligence and information assurance for UK’s government and armed forces.

The plan is expected to be announced in May in the Queen’s Speech. It is a rewrite of a similar plan, which was developed by the Labour Party, but had been shelved in November 2009 due to lack of public support. Then in opposition the Conservatives criticized Labour’s “reckless” record on privacy.

April 3, 2012 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , | Leave a comment