Manchester Attack Could Lead To Internet Crackdown (independent.co.uk) 384
New submitter boundary writes: The UK government looks to be about to put the most egregious parts of the Investigative Powers Act into force "soon after the election" (which is in a couple of weeks) in the wake of the recent bombing in Manchester. "Technical Capability Orders" require tech companies to break their own security. I wonder who'll comply? The Independent reports: "Government will ask parliament to allow the use of those powers if Theresa May is re-elected, senior ministers told The Sun. 'We will do this as soon as we can after the election, as long as we get back in,' The Sun said it was told by a government minister. 'The level of threat clearly proves there is no more time to waste now. The social media companies have been laughing in our faces for too long.'"
They've definitely been laughing (Score:5, Insightful)
But only because so many people are willing to give them all their personal information for free.
Re:They've definitely been laughing (Score:5, Insightful)
No, this isn't just that, this is "we want to access all encrypted information". We must have broken encryption because "terrorism". Basically Theresa May has fascist tendencies she wants to enforce. Unfortunately the other political parties are such a mess at the moment that well... yeah, the whole thing is not good.
We need a slogan (Score:2)
(Government is the best solution for EVERYTHING! Just ask someone in government and they will tell you!!!)
Re:They've definitely been laughing (Score:4, Insightful)
Basically Theresa May has fascist tendencies she wants to enforce.
Yup, time to Godwin this discussion and start calling the British PM "Theresa Maydolf".
The thing that gets me is how few people among the 'general public' understand that every single time a country enacts measures like this, it's an unqualified win for the terrorists. But you can be sure that the leaders of those countries are aware of that fact, and welcome terrorist attacks as excuse and justification for fulfilling their darkest fantasies of domination and subjugation.
The other thing that many people don't stop to think about is that if their governments hadn't insisted on on interfering with other countries' governments and ways of life, we wouldn't have nearly so big a problem with terrorism.
Re:They've definitely been laughing (Score:4, Insightful)
A couple of days later, 100 civilians die from a bombing in Iraq and nobody bats an eye.
Re: (Score:3)
The thing that gets me is how many people project these kinds of motivations onto terrorists. No, I really don't think ISIS gives a fuck if the UK starts snooping on citizens more.
They want non-muslims to hate moderate muslims and associate the attacks with islam in general, thereby boosting their numbers. It all helps, whether achieved through murder or oppressive changes to law.
And yeah, lots of dumbasses are doing their work for them. Golf clap.
This isn't a defence of islam. In my eyes all religions are worthless.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, "in my book" doesn't count as a regular rule of grammar or communication observed by all humans, you actual lazy and yet somehow pedantic imbecile.
Re: (Score:3)
Although on this occasion, yes, the government want to make the Stasi feel like amateurs.
Labour wanted this when they were in power, the coalition only didn't do this because the Lib Dems are happy flower people and the Conservatives would have done this irrespective of the incident in Manchester.
See also the unpublicised consultation that ended last week: https://www.openrightsgroup.or... [openrightsgroup.org]
In other news... (Score:5, Insightful)
...Mainstream media are reporting today that the government was given credible warnings about the suspected bomber as many as five times over the past few years, from a variety of sources and via exactly the sorts of channels you're supposed to use if you're worried that someone might do something like this. None of these source appear to have relied on high-tech surveillance and intercepted communications. They were reportedly based on in-person observations, which tragically doesn't seem to have set off the right alarm bells soon enough.
Re: In other news... (Score:3, Informative)
He and a bunch of others. Are you saying the police should go round up all the other foreigners on their watch list?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm wary of speculating or trusting early information too much in a situation like this. The truth is that I have no idea how many people actually come to the attention of the police and security services so many times or for reasons as disturbing as saying they think suicide bombing is OK. It seems likely that in this case something has gone wrong with the system, obviously with horrible consequences, and no doubt there will be a lot of reviews and discussions in the weeks and months ahead to try and work
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly the ability to monitor all of a persons communications would probably have caught this piece of shit if all of his communications had been monitored. What the Snoopers Charter is disliked for is its envisaged use by general policing and low level bureaucrats in a wide range of government departments. This will obviously lead to widespread criminalization of the population, we will need double the number of jails to hold all the people this will ensnare. Catching terrorists is already a fairly low prio
Re: In other news... (Score:2)
No it won't. There is something called too much data or noise. If you had ALL the fingerprints in the world updating with time of death, it will make case solving worse! The entire database would become useless. You would have too many false leads to weed through. To keep a proper justice system, you would need a lot of man power to execute on the results. Resources that systems just do not have.
We are already at this level of information. This is why "all the signals were there" but ignored happens in
Re: (Score:2)
If someone is saying hey, lets go blow up the train, rounding them up is a good idea. If all they're doing is saying Allah Akbar then certainly not.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Italy just let this guy in, so go figure.
https://cdn.theatlantic.com/as... [theatlantic.com]
Re: (Score:2)
But he will be leaving shortly.
Re: In other news... (Score:5, Insightful)
especially if they look like criminals
That's cool that you know what criminals look like, we could just pay you to go through photographs, and we'll just arrest or deport the ones with the bad faces.
Re: (Score:3)
Jailing might be a bit extreme, but deporting is just fine by me.
Deporting where? If you deported this guy to where he was from you would have sent him to exactly where he went to.
Re: In other news... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Just the muslims will do.
Re: In other news... (Score:5, Insightful)
You saying they shouldn't? The watch list is there for a reason. It's about time they start using it.
I for one, cannot figure why anyone would allow foreigners with even the smallest criminal records, especially if they look like criminals, to stay in their countries at all.
The foreigner who blew himself up at the concert was BORN in the UK. He was as British as Theresa May or Tony Blair.
Amazing isn't it ? At what point is a foreigner not a foreigner anymore ? Careful with your answer otherwise we could classify all people living in the US (minus the native americans) as foreigners. Do we kick them out and give back the US to the native people we stole the lands from ?
Re: In other news... (Score:2, Informative)
Believe? The fact the terrorist was British is not an article of faith. It's a fact.
Re: (Score:2)
> He was as British as Theresa May or Tony Blair.
This is what you ACTUALLY BELIEVE
Exactly, for all intents and purposes May and Blair were not British and did more damage to this country than a thousand nutters with bombs could even dream of.
Re: (Score:2)
Jesus was born in a stable. That doesn't make him a horse.
No but it does mean that he was born in Bethlehem.
Re: (Score:2)
Jesus was born in a stable. That doesn't make him a horse.
Wikipedia: "British people, or Britons, are the citizens of the United Kingdom, British Overseas Territories, and Crown dependencies, and their descendants."
If you want to redefine that to something else then you'll need the worldwide community to agree with you. Maybe you can force them to agree with you... You know, bombs etc. sometimes do the trick?
Found the SJW (Score:3)
Actually countries can decide for themselves who is and who isn't a citizen. Jus soli or Jus sanguinis are the two main priciples.
Worldwide community, WTF is that?
That says a lot more about your attitudes than it does mine.
Re: In other news... (Score:5, Insightful)
This particular attacker was born in the UK, in Manchester, and therefore not a foreigner.
Legally, yes.
Culturally, morally, and ideologically?
He might as well have had blue skin and spoke Betelgeusean.
That's the problem with the ME refugees; They come to Western nations but never leave their original country. They just bring a piece of it with them, and soon, as their numbers swell, all those little pieces join together and marginalize the native culture until it looks and feels much like where they fled from, including bombings, beheadings, rapes, pedophilia, murder, and the rest of the ME cultural armageddon.
TPTB want a major global shift in power and economics. Major changes can be made during major crisis.
Western leaders know full well that bringing in masses of poorly-vetted Muslim refugees is dangerous and will lead to conflict. That's the goal. Just look at TFA. Crisis => invasions of privacy. They set up the conditions for the crisis and step in to "save the day" with new losses to individual liberty and privacy.
If this were in a medical context, we'd be discussing Munchausen syndrome by proxy with Western citizens the victims and their governments their abusers.
Strat
Re: (Score:2)
Western leaders know full well that bringing in masses of poorly-vetted Muslim refugees is dangerous and will lead to conflict. That's the goal. Just look at TFA. Crisis => invasions of privacy. They set up the conditions for the crisis and step in to "save the day" with new losses to individual liberty and privacy.
If this were in a medical context, we'd be discussing Munchausen syndrome by proxy with Western citizens the victims and their governments their abusers.
No, Strat, we'd be discussing paranoia and why people believe in ludicrous conspiracy theories: https://xkcd.com/258/ [xkcd.com]
Re: In other news... (Score:5, Insightful)
He might as well have had blue skin and spoke Betelgeusean.
After the attack, Mail Online journalist Katie Hopkins went as far as to call for a new holocaust to eradicate Muslims in a tweet. The point is, even for someone who I'm sure you would regard as culturally British, extremism exists.
Posts like yours, where you argue that even the children of immigrants aren't British, and are in fact so different from us that they are completely alien, just encourage extremist views like that. And from there, all it needs are some mental health issues and careful grooming to turn that person into a weapon.
Re: In other news... (Score:5, Interesting)
Posts like yours, where you argue that even the children of immigrants aren't British, and are in fact so different from us that they are completely alien, just encourage extremist views like that.
Reality is often extreme and quite rude, as are many people and their beliefs such as radical Islamists. To refuse to acknowledge reality because it may at times seem 'extreme' to delicate sensibilities is irrational.
Britain is once again being invaded, and British leadership cheer for the invaders.
Strat
Re: In other news... (Score:5, Insightful)
To refuse to acknowledge reality because it may at times seem 'extreme' to delicate sensibilities is irrational.
Refusing to accept demonstrably untrue claims is rational. Clearly, the vast majority of children of immigrants are well integrated.
As I demonstrated, white "native" British people seem to be just as prone to thinking that mass murder can be acceptable. In fact, the main cultural difference is that jihadis are willing to commit suicide, where as European terrorists prefer to survive the attack.
Need I remind you of that Breivik guy? Killed far more children and young people, and in a far more cold and calculated way since he was able to witness the suffering he was inflicting and sustained his attack for an extended period of time. This kind of mental illness and descent into hatred is not unique to Muslims of refugees or the children of immigrants from particular countries.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The simple truth is that 24/7/365 surveillance of a target is expen$ive. It was mentioned in BBC interviews that full coverage of an individual requires something like 70 people with air and ground assets, analysts, investigators, etc. The UK and also the US are wealthy countries, but we don't have the resources to cover everyone on the suspicious list with that level of monitoring. The UK could probably monitor a few dozen suspects at that level for a limited amount of time. They have thousands of people o
Re: (Score:2)
Physical surveillance would be a hopelessly inefficient approach. Building bombs requires supplies, and purchases of such supplies can and should be tracked. I mean, I'm not advocating that buying nails should require a photo ID, but if somebody goes into a hardware store and buys hundreds of dollars' worth of nails using cash, that should raise red flags, and should get reported along with surveillance camera photos.
Similarly, if somebody buys any quantity of nails on a credit card belonging to someone
Re:In other news... (Score:5, Insightful)
None of these source appear to have relied on high-tech surveillance and intercepted communications
We know that. And we know also that most people, maybe 95%, don't have the necessary scientific background to comprehend that fact, and presented with the horror of these attacks, will comply without blinking to more Internet censoring.
Re:In other news... (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new... [telegraph.co.uk]
It appears the authorities were warned on five (!) separate occasions about this boy being mentally unstable and embracing terrorism by people who knew him personally. They ignored it.
To be honest, they might have thought the suspect was just a buffoon. You can't go round arresting every loony you find. But what you can do is pay such people a visit (you can even use social workers for that if the police has a capacity problem) and/or interview them at the police station, have a mental assessment done, and see who they're connected with.
Well, now is the time to improve procedures instead of outlawing encryption and introducing Internet censorship..
Re: (Score:3)
This guy was just a tool, used by the ones who planned the attack and built the bomb. If he had been arrested, they would have used someone else. They take standard precautions to make sure that low level people like him being picked up doesn't compromise the ones higher up.
They have been doing it that way for decades now. The police are running around blowing up doors and random "packages" that turn out to be nothing, but it would be crazy to assume that those responsible had not anticipated their actions
Re: (Score:2)
They get ten thousand similar reports a week. They can't possibly follow up on all of them.
Monday morning quarterback.
Re:In other news... (Score:5, Insightful)
They get ten thousand similar reports a week. They can't possibly follow up on all of them.
But they can possibly follow up on all filter hits from UK's teeny-tiny Internet traffic, right? ;)
Re: (Score:2)
HI
(you can even use social workers for that if the police has a capacity problem)
Unfortunately, the social services have the same capacity problems that police does in the UK. We have an ageing population, increasing tax revenue from working people and companies is complicated. Even if we did fund everything better, recruiting and convincing the village idiot to blow themselves up is likely to be much cheaper than anything authorities can do about it.
In any case, Theresa May would not miss an opportunity to "do something" about the internet.
Re:In other news... (Score:5, Insightful)
His Dad was also a Libyan militant, in Libya, who he had just visited, days before the bombing.
This guy is a poster child for the type of person that should be picked up trivially if MI5 was even half way competent. There's literally no reason if MI5 were doing this job that this guy should've slipped through the net - just about every indicator for potential terrorist was ticked, and they failed to follow it up.
I agree with you - on it's own, you can't just pick people up based on reports. But I don't imagine there's too many people flying back from ISIS hotbeds with family that are linked to militant groups, and who have been reported for saying "suicide bombings are okay" repeatedly over a number of years, including by others in his extended family and local Imams.
I simply cannot comprehend what MI5 are doing to have managed to have missed this one. I've often written before that all the terrorists that slip through the net in the West whether it's in the US, France, or the UK all seem to be known to the security services, but this particular case shows an astoundingly exceptional level of incompetence compared to even those.
How can they ask for more access to data when they can't even work with intel handed to them on a plate?
Re: (Score:3)
To be honest, they might have thought the suspect was just a buffoon. You can't go round arresting every loony you find. But what you can do is pay such people a visit (you can even use social workers for that if the police has a capacity problem) and/or interview them at the police station, have a mental assessment done, and see who they're connected with.
I'm sure they would have done that and more, if they had the resources. Regrettably, they don't. Remember, we have been in the grip of the Conservative goverment's austerity policies for what almost feels like a lifetime, because of the financial crisis, which in turn was caused by the drive towards privatisation and deregulation over the last few decades. I know there are people who don't want to admit that this is the way it is, but I think most of us realise that this is true. I'm not really a huge fan o
Re:In other news... (Score:4, Insightful)
Vote these Tory idiots out before Daesh turn the country into a smoking ruin.
Re: (Score:2)
*Did* they ignore it? The wonderful thing with intelligence is you don't get to hear what they did or didn't do. They might have investigated him and found him to be mentally unstable with an interest in terrorism, but the evidence may have fallen short of proof of criminal activity.
If that was the case, we can do what the US do and intern people without trial, or we can let them remain free in society. If there are enough people like this, you can't effectively monitor them all, so you have to accept th
not enough info (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If the y get 5 per day in average and can realistically investigate 10, no excuse. But if they get 50 per day for the same workforce, the y have to prioritize, and maybe
...just maybe they should investigate someone for whom they have had five separate reports.
Re: (Score:2)
While I still tend towards "incompetence" and not "intent", it is getting harder. Obviously, May does regard this as an excellent opportunity to push stronger for her anti-freedom agenda (which will do exactly nothing to curb terrorism, but may encourage it).
Re:In other news... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:In other news... (Score:4, Insightful)
All islamists are muslims, not all muslims are islamists.
There once was a time when christianity was a political idea as much as a religious one (and in some places it still is). In fact, pick ANY organized religion and I can offer you numerous examples of said religion being used as an extension of politics to support violence, subjugation of non-believers and military expansion. It just so happens that when the starting point of a belief is '$OUR_GROUP has access to Ultimate Truth(tm) about the universe and who do not agree with us are wrong by definition' that can be easily used to instigate tribal conflicts.
I fully agree that islamist groups ought to be tolerated no more than any other groups seeking to overthrow freedom of religion and other core values of civilized societies, but you cannot get from that to 'therefore all muslims are evil' any more than I can get from the fact that there are christian dominionists in the US who'd like to establish a 'christian nation' to saying all the lutherans here in Finland must also be raging theocrats that need to be opposed.
The Internet isn't the only way to communicate (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The Internet isn't the only way to communicate (Score:4, Interesting)
The very smart thing the UK did was never to mention collection to lawyers, the media, human rights groups or its own police.
Very interesting people in Ireland and the US, UK kept on talking, funding, making calls, arranging meetings, moving hardware thinking phone calls and voice prints could only be used in the Soviet Union for a select few Soviet mil sites and officials.
The very interesting people in the UK do not need the internet. They can use their holidays to move information in person.
The UK solved the "This could include face to face" meeting issue down to two people meeting in isolated areas.
Get the voice prints, the faces and follow a person all over Ireland, the UK with vans, trucks, cars, helicopters, early satalite tracking. Find out who they meet, record the talk or exchange and then offer both sides a "deal" to work for the UK intelligence services.
The deal on offer was usually accepted.
As people who got turned early on moved up to more trusted Irish networks, more interesting people got exposed and got offered the same deal.
The UK police, media, lawyers, human rights groups never really worked that aspect out.
The other aspect was support from the USA. The US was not interested in UK/Irish issues so the UK had to act in the USA without US knowledge.
The same methods got used in the US and support and funding from the US to Ireland was tracked and later "found" with a good cover story.
Face to face meeting provide not much of the expected cover if one or both people are known or the meeting place is been watched
Re:The Internet isn't the only way to communicate (Score:5, Interesting)
They were interested but on the wrong side. Senator Peter King was very active and vocal in his support for the IRA and lobbied for US law enforcement to deny assistance to the UK. I've got no idea why he wasn't voted out after 9/11 or thrown out of the Republican Party entirely due to his history of supporting terrorists.
Re:The Internet isn't the only way to communicate (Score:5, Interesting)
The IRA where never beaten by counterterrorism forces. They where beaten by the peace process. Thats a historical fact. All the spies, wiretapes and surveilance from the full might of the british establishment could never crack the IRAs primary command structure, only bust the occasional cell and react to incidents after the fact. What succeeded was creating a political environment where Sinn Fein and the UK govt could negotiate a peace such that Irish patriots didn't need the IRA anymore.
Thats a very different kettle of fish to the jihadis
Re:The Internet isn't the only way to communicate (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If the Internet and the World Wide Web become too dangerous for terrorists to communicate they'll find other ways to communicate their nefarious plans which may be more immune to cracking. This could include face to face meetings in secure venues such as caves or messenger transmissions.
Really. You're not curious as to why after decades of face to face meetings and messenger transmissions they switched to using social media? You don't think that maybe, just maybe, they adopted social media because it allows for a loose, decentralized form of terrorism, as opposed to a complex structure with secret protocols and challenging geographical restrictions that can be more easily taken down?
Bring up privacy issues if you have to, but please, let's not make up absurd reasons for not making it more
Re: (Score:2)
People lie to get into a nation, lie to get into the security services. They stay loyal to their faith, their politics and spy on the security services.
No way to talk to their parents, grand parents, friends, teachers, consider university politics, discover reading material, net use over years.
The security services made many mistakes by just trusting people in the 1920-70's.
People stay loyal to their faith and will any lie to get work with the police and security servi
Re: (Score:2)
The security services tried that in the 1920-70's in a few different nations.
Their secrets and methods walked out as the "recruit" stayed loyal to their own nations, faiths, cults, politics and pretended to be loyal to the nations that trusted them.
Thats why the security services walk the life of their staff, talk to their parents and grand parents. Look at their school work, friends, university. What their parents did, their parents politics. What they read, do on
Some idiots don't believe that "low-tech" works (Score:5, Informative)
"Cracking down on the internet" will do nothing but inconvenience innocent ordinary citizens.
The US had a very hard time finding Osama bin Laden after 9/11. He dropped off the net, and no cellphones either. He communicated via trusted couriers.
Another example is "Millenium Challenge 2002" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] This was a simulated war game with "Blue" force (USA) versus "Red" force (middle eastern, probably Iran).
> Red, commanded by retired Marine Corps Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper, adopted
> an asymmetric strategy, in particular, using old methods to evade Blue's sophisticated electronic
> surveillance network. Van Riper used motorcycle messengers to transmit orders to front-line
> troops and World-War-II-style light signals to launch airplanes without radio communications.
The initial result was an absolute disaster for "Blue" at the beginning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
>At this point, the exercise was suspended, Blue's ships were "re-floated", and the rules of engagement were changed;
[...deletia...]
> After the war game was restarted, its participants were forced to follow a script
> drafted to ensure a Blue Force victory. Among other rules imposed by this script,
> Red Force was ordered to turn on their anti-aircraft radar in order for them to be
> destroyed, and was not allowed to shoot down any of the aircraft bringing Blue
> Force troops ashore. Van Riper also claimed that exercise officials denied him
> the opportunity to use his own tactics and ideas against Blue Force, and that they
> also ordered Red Force not to use certain weapons systems against Blue Force
> and even ordered the location of Red Force units to be revealed.
The USA lost to "low tech" in Viet Nam. Afghanistan and Iraq weren't exactly "glorious victories" either. The UK seems to be falling into the same trap. They'll only succeed in shutting down internet connectivity for innocent citizens. Terrorists will continue to use "sneakernet", trusted couriers, etc.
Re: (Score:3)
Watch them start their own number station. Try and block that.
Re: (Score:3)
Why would they need to? Radio direction finding is well understood, and the transmitter will be located in short order. Ofcom continuously monitors and triangulates transmissions and will undoubtedly be sharing this data with GCHQ.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. The Snoopers Charter is extremely dangerous to individual freedoms of ordinary citizens, but it will do absolutely nothing to reduce terrorism. It may encourage terrorism though, because the terrorists must think they are winning.
Re:The Mosque (Score:5, Informative)
According to the front page story in today's Telegraph, a mosque banned him and reported him to the authorities because of his extremist views.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The Mosque (Score:5, Informative)
Um, do you even know the history of Britain. Look up "the Troubles". The IRA were way more sophisticated than any would-be Jihadi. They even managed to blow up Prince Charles' uncle. All ISIS's band of maniacs seem able to do is blow up concert goers and little girls.
Re: (Score:2)
All ISIS's band of maniacs seem able to do is blow up concert goers and little girls.
Could they have staged an attack on centers of power like 9/11? Those hit the Pentagon, WTC towers and the 4th plane was probably going for the White House or Congress. They have hit places like Charlie Hebdo. But going after "important" people would imply that the "unimportant" people were pretty much safe except for some collateral damage. They want everyone to feel unsafe just for going to a concert or restaurant or nightclub or football game or Christmas market or beach stroll or running the marathon or
Re:The Mosque (Score:4, Insightful)
The IRA could easily have done something like 9/11. It's not like it was that hard at the time to take over a plane and fly it into a building. There are two reasons why they didn't which both stem from the fact that their motives were political, not ideological.
Firstly, they never did suicide attacks. The IRA perceived themselves as soldiers fighting for a cause, not jihadis fighting for God. Consequently, there were no IRA suicide attacks. 9/11 would have been impossible if you had to factor in an escape plan for the perpetrators.
Secondly, (and admittedly this didn't always apply) they had a concept of enemy combatants and civilians. As a rule their attacks were targeted at the system that prevented a united Ireland (police officers, politicians, soldiers) or causing disruption rather than deaths. If they planted a bomb targeted at civilian areas, they normally sent a warning to the police.
Also, let's not forget that they several times got close to "centres of power". They successfully murdered a British MP in the House of Commons car park, they slaughtered a troop of mounted ceremonial cavalry in Hyde Park, they murdered a relative of the Queen and they came close to assassinating the prime minister and many important cabinet ministers at a party conference.
Re: The Mosque (Score:2, Insightful)
Mate, the IRA basically established the modern Terror franchise. They were terrorists before all the cool kids were doing it. If you looked up "Terrorist" in the dictionary before 9/11 it would have just been a picture of an Irish bomb maker
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
You're implying that there is something innately wrong with terrorism.
I believe that terrorism/guerrilla/freedom fighting is warranted in some circumstances. Though not for purely religious reasons. There has to be a political component that cannot be addressed peacefully -- and the Troubles fit that description.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a matter of scale. But first, there's some issues:
The monotheistic religions go on the premise that there's one God, one true way, one single identity which is above all else.
In history, many regions of the world have seen the rise of empires, which expanded through war and conquest.
An empire is a large social order, and so monotheistic religion and empire building were very similar, and worked hand in hand.
So it was noble to die for King and empire and God.
The notion of empire isn't that there are a b
Re: (Score:2)
Guilty by default? (Score:4, Interesting)
It is an ominous action what was performed when parents were waiting to pickup their children after a concert.
After declaring something that it is true, let's talk about technology and the justification to violate the privacy human right in the name of security.
If there is any justification to break all rights trying to catch terrorists, then we must stop using paper because somebody "could" have been designing a terrorist act in a piece of paper. Let's also stop talking, because when we talk could be possible that we let others to receive messages describing how to perform terrorist acts.
Let's give the authorities the right to use "advanced" interrogation methods, because we could be thinking on performing terrorist acts and, in general, let's become guilty by default in a world were it is enforced to demonstrate that we are not guilty on any possible action that could hurt others.
The main problem is that the human being it is very capable to bypass the obvious communication methods and the bad people will continue performing bad actions in one or another way, and in the middle all the really innocent people will become guilty by default and the freedom that humanity has been working to acquire during thousands of years and millions of lives will be lost in just some years. And if this happen, the terrorists will win the war.
Re:Guilty by default? (Score:4, Informative)
The main problem is people overreact. This isn't a Luftwaffe bombing campaign, there is no existential threat against the British state, so the idea that British authorities should just start torturing people seems like outrageous overreaction.
Re:Guilty by default? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, you do have something to fear. The removal of your privacy and the abuse of these powers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
You should probably read it.
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on what is the "current" definition for "wrong".
Some day the governments establish some generic framework because of a valid reason, but then they change the parameters and that framework can be used legally for something different. If the framework has an opportunity to provide excessive power to the authorities, always will exist a high possibility that it be used against its original purpose. And this is not a naive idea, our human history is full of cruel examples.
Re: (Score:2)
You should trust your government. You elected it.
For the most part, the government is not the people that were elected. The government is the cadre of civil servants who keep their jobs no matter who is elected. The lifers who feasts at the public trough and who quietly and relentlessly promote their own agenda with little regard to the nation's wishes. The ones who leak documents to the media or to Wikileaks when they dislike the people in office, or who bury evidence of mischiefs when they do like them.
That's the real government, and no I don't trust th
Ahh... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
And what is it you're supposed to do with a warning. Their could be dozens or hundreds or probably more individuals whom authorities are being warned about; terrorists, murderers, rapists, Mafioso and plenty of other people that some foreign and/or domestic intelligence agencies are warning any government about. In a lot of cases until they actually strap on a nail bomb or gun down a competing mobster, any government is stuck with finite resources and trying to find the most efficient way to use them.
The fa
Re: (Score:2)
The UK might not have ever had free speech that you're worried about them losing.
If I were Amazon... (Score:2)
will they force apple to unlock phones as well? (Score:2)
will they force apple to unlock phones as well?
Who else is sick of governmental opportunism? (Score:3)
Legislation only removes objects, even virtual and intangible, from the law abiding public.
Not from those outside the law who will carry on doing what they do.
Manchester was someone outside of the law and this crackdown does nothing, yet again, to prevent re-occurance.
Government's cause terrorism, who in turn target the public for voting them in.
You end up feeling like the pig in the middle between both extremists (legislative & violent).
Time to stop coddling the fascists (Score:2, Interesting)
As many here have pointed out, attacks like this were far from unknown during "The Troubles". Yet somehow, the UK managed to muddle through without turning into a police state.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_Great_Britain
May and the rest of her pet fascists need a strong lesson in reality, and I don't think the voters can deliver it without some encouragement about votes having consequences.
I wonder what would happen if every social media account in the UK...all of them...stopp
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What, there were no telephones? No other ways for terrorists to communicate without actually meeting? You were right, perhaps unintentionally, when you spoke of "government control of the population". Because that's what this is about. Not terrorism, but control.
Today is NOT a different story, at least not as far as this loathsome law is concerned.
Re: (Score:2)
Let no disaster go to waste (Score:3)
Just like our government used 9/11 to implement all kinds of useless but intrusive laws to poke into our private lives, expect the UK to do the same. It's unlikely something that protects the citizen will come about, but that really isn't the point. The government has a golden opportunity to do all kinds of shit that people would normally be up in arms about, but now they will cheer the erosion of rights along.
Clueless politicians strike again. (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately (Score:3, Interesting)
Unfortunately it is likely to be a crackdown on people supporting equality, democracy, and free speech and pointing out that Islam is against all of these. The muslims will be allowed to carry on as normal.
Why is it that when the muslims say they fear reprisals from non-muslims after an attack it is fine, but when non-muslims say they fear further attacks by the muslims it's islamophobia?
Surprise! (Score:2)
The existing anti-terrorism laws didn't work so we need more of the same shit, even if this guy is a loopy mass murderer and has nothing to do with terrorism.
How convenient that governments can use their own incompetence to increase their power.
Cui bono? (Score:2)
In fact the original text of Marcus Tullius Cicero's speach was: "...asking, time and again, To whose benefit?" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
The Sun? (Score:2)
You must be joking, that's the local equivalent of the National Enquirer.
If there is something to learn with Trump.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Is that you never, ever, EVER give the president a power that you will regret later when someone like Trump steps in.
Re:Come out ye Black and Tans (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to marginalize the awfulness of those bombings, but I don't remember a lot of them that specifically targeted young girls. That takes a special kind of evil.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Not sure what good a gun does against an exploding suicide vest, but whatever.
Re: (Score:3)
Also, the IRA's goal was to blow stuff up and survive. This involves getting in and either placing the device well in advance (which risks it being discovered) or sneaking out after depositing it (which risks either the device or the bomber being spotted).
It's an order of magnitude harder.
Re: (Score:2)
Moving into the UK at that time was not a case of anyone just wondering in as it is now.
Landlords did chat downs, police looked at all new faces in their area. Who had a job, what job, if not who was supporting a new person? What did they do all day?
Mixing with other interesting people in locations of interest and not working?
Accents, reports and paperwork was of