Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

interestrateripoff

Gchq Views Data Without A Warrant, Government Admits

Recommended Posts

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/29/gchq-nsa-data-surveillance

British intelligence services can access raw material collected in bulk by the NSA and other foreign spy agencies without a warrant, the government has confirmed for the first time.

GCHQ’s secret “arrangements” for accessing bulk material are revealed in documents submitted to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, the UK surveillance watchdog, in response to a joint legal challenge by Privacy International, Liberty and Amnesty International. The legal action was launched in the wake of the Edward Snowden revelations published by the Guardian and other news organisations last year.

The government’s submission discloses that the UK can obtain “unselected” – meaning unanalysed, or raw intelligence – information from overseas partners without a warrant if it was “not technically feasible” to obtain the communications under a warrant and if it is “necessary and proportionate” for the intelligence agencies to obtain that information.

The rules essentially permit bulk collection of material, which can include communications of UK citizens, provided the request does not amount to “deliberate circumvention” of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (Ripa), which governs much of the UK’s surveillance activities.

Everyone is guilty no one is innocent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For 99.9% of people this is of no consequence.

And so what if it is. If it stops some nutter with a bomb getting on a bus or tube train then I have no issue with it as I wouldn't have with the compulsory issue of individual ID cards.

If they pick up a few radical preachers and kiddie fiddlers porn merchants in the process then all the better.

50 years ago electronic comms fax email ect never existed. 100 years ago and you are back before the telephone when no doubt all they concerned themselves with was intercepting mail.

Spying moves with the times as does everything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether or not one find this justified in the current 'boogy man' climate of fear, it is important to be wary of the erosion of what few civil liberties we have left. No such thing as privacy? Well, that might be fine for most of us at this particular moment in time (though I don't accept the "if you've done nothing wrong then you've nothing to fear" argument), but it does rather presume that we all trust that government and society won't be sliding towards a (more) fascistic mode any time soon. Once legislation is passed, or current legal frameworks ignored (we hear your legal arguments about privacy and warrants and whatnot, but really we'll just do whatever the ****** we like, regardless), it is a slippery slope and very difficult to go back to the previous reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem of course is that those that seek and get power are those who are generally least suited to having it. They are not good people to be making laws. As is often demonstrated they are completely out of touch and will act for personal benefit rather than with dispassionate servitude - the honour of serving.

The ongoing creep of state intrusion is so at odds with our way of life/expectations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For 99.9% of people this is of no consequence.

And so what if it is. If it stops some nutter with a bomb getting on a bus or tube train then I have no issue with it as I wouldn't have with the compulsory issue of individual ID cards.

If they pick up a few radical preachers and kiddie fiddlers porn merchants in the process then all the better.

50 years ago electronic comms fax email ect never existed. 100 years ago and you are back before the telephone when no doubt all they concerned themselves with was intercepting mail.

Spying moves with the times as does everything else.

I beg to differ.this is NOT our system of governance.

the politicians need to know their place.

this is the difference between EU politicians and british politicians.

EU Politicians(ie barroso etc) see themselves as leaders, and the public subservient

under british law, our politicians are OUR EMPLOYEES...they do as we tell them...if they do not, we can kick them out, jail them or hang them...depending on the degree of violation from their employment contract.

Our system of governance is supposed to be much like the swiss/US

and that INCLUDES the right to bear arms...that is to keep government officials from over-stepping the mark...which they have(and consistently have for the past 40 years).

when our elected officials are in violation of the law, they have to be held to account. Simple.

Not even the king/queen has the right to invoke divine right here.we have executed kings for less than the crap we are presently putting up with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For 99.9% of people this is of no consequence.

And so what if it is. If it stops some nutter with a bomb getting on a bus or tube train then I have no issue with it as I wouldn't have with the compulsory issue of individual ID cards.

If they pick up a few radical preachers and kiddie fiddlers porn merchants in the process then all the better.

Utterly shocking. Some risk and some unfortunate outcomes is a price worth paying to not get treated like potential scum, to potentially constantly have to justify and explain youself, to exist on sufference.

Security services have to sneak about and act unsavoury sometimes but that is very a definitely a case of "with great power comes great responsibility." They need to be trying their best to only hit those who deserve to hit, to respect the privacy of those who have every right to turn around and tell them "none of your business." They'll make mistakes of course from time to time and we have to accept that (and they'll need to answer for it). They should never be allowed to dig in to anything about anyone, or even know of their existence, without prior reason, in just the same way that the police shouldn't ever be allowed to arrest anyone without at least a good reason for thinking that they might be involved in a crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ongoing creep of state intrusion is so at odds with our way of life/expectations.

I'm not sure it is. Not any more.

The reaction to the steady drip drip drip of snooping revelations, itself a form of conditioning, hasn't been exactly earth-shaking.

Same with the revelations about those grooming rings being allowed to carry on and on, and all sorts of other bits and bobs.

Invade a country on a lie, with no repercussions? No probs.

It might be that the PTB have hit upon a winning formula to do WTF they want, without barely ever having to employ any muscle to keep the flock in line at all.

It's a bit difficult to ponder where we go from here without feeling a little pessimistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's probably an entire department watching Nigel & Co.

Imagine the killing you'd make if you listened in to some of the city people's calls..... like just before they announce misplacing half a billion.

Of course human beings would never behave in this manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For 99.9% of people this is of no consequence.

And so what if it is. If it stops some nutter with a bomb getting on a bus or tube train then I have no issue with it as I wouldn't have with the compulsory issue of individual ID cards.

If they pick up a few radical preachers and kiddie fiddlers porn merchants in the process then all the better.

50 years ago electronic comms fax email ect never existed. 100 years ago and you are back before the telephone when no doubt all they concerned themselves with was intercepting mail.

Spying moves with the times as does everything else.

Sorry, but I can't agree with any of that, can you not see the thin end of the wedge?

As others have said, civil liberty is important and has been hard won over the centuries, what is left of it after Blair's authoritarian reforms should be cherished.

If the price for guaranteed personal safety is the loss of privacy and personal freedom, the price is too high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is 'snooping' on gchq ? That's what I want to know.

Because if its nobody - which is more than likely - they have free reign to do what they want when they want.

But of course - nobody working there would take advantage of this for their own personal gain - would they .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're doing nothing wrong, you've nothing they should be spying on.

If you're an innocent upstanding citizen, you won't mind them implanting you with an RFID biochip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're an innocent upstanding citizen, you won't mind them implanting you with an RFID biochip.

For him, that's a good idea! :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Controversial snooping bill ruled illegal by UK High Court


Britain’s High Court has ruled that emergency surveillance legislation pushed through parliament in 2014, which gave police and security services unprecedented access to citizens’ private data, is illegal.

The High Court ruled against the former Lib Dem-Conservative coalition’s Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act (Dripa), and ordered it to pass new legislation by the end of March 2015 [sic - should be March 2016 according to the BBC].

Two MPs had brought a legal challenge against the government, saying the legislation was a violation of European human rights law. The MPs’ legal challenge, which was supported by human rights group Liberty, argued that the legislation allowed police and security services to monitor citizens without proper safeguards.

High Court judges found that the Act, which was fast-tracked through Parliament last July, is “inconsistent with EU law.” They argued it breaches Articles 7 and 8 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.

http://www.rt.com/uk/310125-too-easy-to-spy-controversial/

So that's why the Tories want to abolish the European human rights law in the UK, it interferes with their snooping laws... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Gubmint passed retrospective laws making some GCHQ snooping unillegal. Thats how laws work when you are above them.

But it's OK. Theresa May declared that the Gubmint had 'tacit approval' from the public for snooping.

'Approval' as in us not objecting to it, because we weren't being told about it.

It is all necessary to keep us safe from the Antimaccasar Liberation Army.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snooping is rubbish. because I have tried it, and you don't get to see much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're doing nothing wrong, you've nothing they should be spying on.

Just because someone is doing nothing illegal does not mean they won't be affected by restrictions on privacy.

For example if the govt restricts or compromises security on the internet, you then buy something from a legitimate online shop, but a hacker manages to harvest your details and empty your bank account.

In this example you haven't done anything wrong but have lost a ton of money due to the restricted privacy.

The internet is used for lots of very different things and its hard to predict the result of well meaning government meddling, it's a complicated area to which there are no easy answers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snooping is rubbish. because I have tried it, and you don't get to see much.

I know what you mean. I tried stalking once but it ridiculously difficult. You can't really fit a full time job around it plus most people are boring and sit in front of the telly for hours starting s thirty smartphones. I nearly fell out of the tree in boredom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what you mean. I tried stalking once but it ridiculously difficult. You can't really fit a full time job around it plus most people are boring and sit in front of the telly for hours starting s thirty smartphones. I nearly fell out of the tree in boredom.

You had a tree? :( Luxury!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The internet is used for lots of very different things and its hard to predict the result of well meaning government meddling

Why do you think they mean well?

A government that wants to spy on everyone almost certainly does not.

BTW, I read a great article some time ago about MI5's dismal failures during the Cold War, where apparently the Russians got so fed up with one of their British agents that they deliberately arranged to meet in places where they assumed MI5 would be watching, so they'd see him meeting KGB agents and arrest him. If the glorious 'Security Services' couldn't even spot double-agents when the KGB were doing their best to make them obvious, they're not likely to be spotting bad guys' messages in the vast amount of data crossing the Internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   221 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.