from the maybe-'cuz-they-can't-justify-it dept.
UK Home Secretary Theresa May was grilled on Wednesday during the last evidence session held by the Parliamentary committee scrutinizing fresh powers proposed for GCHQ.
Crucially, she was unable to explain to the panel exactly why Blighty's intelligence services need the ability to intercept and retain millions of innocent Britons' data in bulk, as well carry out bulk hacking operations, which would be strongly authorised if draft law – the Investigatory Powers Bill (IPB) – is passed.
While the joint committee was pleased that GCHQ's bulk surveillance and hacking operations are being brought completely within parliamentary reign for the first time, having previously been effected through royal prerogative, the panel noted that the agency's sweeping powers have not yet been justified in operational terms.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/01/13/theresa_may/
-- submitted from IRC
Related Stories
takyon writes:
It's that time of the year again. Time to talk about drugs and the war on them because some stoners declared a holiday or something.
A recent article in Harper's Magazine includes the following gem that sums up the modern Drug War's origins. The journalist interviewed John Ehrlichman, one of the Watergate co-conspirators:
At the time, I was writing a book about the politics of drug prohibition. I started to ask Ehrlichman a series of earnest, wonky questions that he impatiently waved away. "You want to know what this was really all about?" he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. "The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."
[Oh yes, it continues...]
from the tyrant dept.
UK Home Secretary Theresa May is favored to become the new leader of the Conservatives and the UK's next Prime Minister following a first round of voting, the elimination of Liam Fox, drop out of Stephen Crabb, and the earlier drop out of Boris Johnson:
Home Secretary Theresa May has comfortably won the first round of the contest to become the next Conservative leader and UK prime minister. Mrs May got 165 of the 329 votes cast by Tory MPs. Andrea Leadsom came second with 66 votes. Michael Gove got 48. [...] Further voting will narrow the field to two. The eventual outcome, decided by party members, is due on 9 September. Following the result, frontrunner Mrs May - who campaigned for the UK to stay in the EU - received the backing of Mr Fox, a former defence secretary and Brexit campaigner, and Mr Crabb, the work and pensions secretary, who backed Remain.
[...] Mrs May - who has said she will deliver Brexit if PM - said she was "pleased" with the result and "grateful" to colleagues for their support. She said there was a "big job" ahead to unite the party and the country following the referendum, to "negotiate the best possible deal as we leave the EU" and to "make Britain work for everyone". She added: "I am the only candidate capable of delivering these three things as prime minister, and tonight it is clear that I am also the only one capable of drawing support from the whole of the Conservative Party."
Update: The race to lead the Conservative Party and become the next Prime Minister of the UK is down to two women: Theresa May and Andrea Leadsom:
Some things in life are very predictable... the Earth continues to orbit around the Sun and Theresa May is trying to crack down on the Internet and ban/break encryption:
In the wake of Saturday's terrorist attack in London, the Prime Minister Theresa May has again called for new laws to regulate the internet, demanding that internet companies do more to stamp out spaces where terrorists can communicate freely. "We cannot allow this ideology the safe space it needs to breed," she said. "Yet that is precisely what the internet and the big companies that provide internet-based services provide."
Her comments echo those made in March by the home secretary, Amber Rudd. Speaking after the previous terrorist attack in London, Rudd said that end-to-end encryption in apps like WhatsApp is "completely unacceptable" and that there should be "no hiding place for terrorists".
[...] "Theresa May's response is predictable but disappointing," says Paul Bernal at the University of East Anglia, UK. "If you stop 'safe places' for terrorists, you stop safe places for everyone, and we rely on those safe places for a great deal of our lives."
Last month New Scientist called for a greater understanding of technology among politicians. Until that happens, having a reasonable conversation about how best to tackle extremism online will remain out of reach.
End-to-end encryption is completely unacceptable? Now that's what I call an endorsement.
[more...]
(Score: 2) by jasassin on Friday January 15 2016, @01:41PM
Welcome to America.
jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0xE6462C68A9A3DB5A
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday January 15 2016, @02:53PM
I wish all the cretins who want to spy on Tammy Q. Citizen* just because they can would stumble. Stumble right off the edge of the Niagara Falls observatory, or over the edge of Victoria Falls, or, just stumble right off the edge of the earth. They could just do us all a favor, and set themselves on fire, die a horrible death, and leave nothing behind for honest men and women to clean up.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday January 15 2016, @03:59PM
* there is no footnote
I would assume the person had perfectly good reasons (from their perspective, obviously), just nothing they could actually tell the people and not have a riot on their hands. What is this world coming to when politicians can't even lie effectively to a question they should know will be asked?
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday January 15 2016, @05:51PM
Oh - the missing footie. I put Tommie Q. Citizen, because it's a British story, wouldn't be right to put John Q. Public in there. Then I realized that the story was about a female, changed it to Tammy, then forgot to eliminate the * afterward. You know, the kind of crap senile old fools do all the time. BTW - what were we talking about? ;^(
(Score: 3, Funny) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Friday January 15 2016, @10:45PM
* there is no footnote
You have realised the truth.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Nerdfest on Friday January 15 2016, @03:09PM
Looks like they hadn't collected enough blackmail information on the members of that panel. How dare they question it?
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday January 15 2016, @04:33PM
Given that God is out of fashion in Western Europe, the state has to be the all-knowing entity that keeps people looking over their shoulder when they misbehave.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday January 15 2016, @05:59PM
Now, that's awfully damned scary. People always demand gods, heros, kings, dictators, sports heros, religious leaders, military leaders. If "god is dead", he has to be replaced with something. Yeah, without their gods, or God, any god will do, people are far more likely to accept an intrusive "Big Brother" government. Maybe even demand one.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Friday January 15 2016, @06:25PM
Plenty of people coming into europe now with backwards views over magical sky fairys. It's a problem, not a major one, but certainly a problem.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Zz9zZ on Friday January 15 2016, @05:38PM
If they can't figure out a reasonable justification after all these years then I think it is time for them to shut down the system and ACTIVELY begin research and deployment of open source security software, you know, for the security of their nation and its people! But I guess most of these orgs believe that the "country" is only really represented by the people at the top. Everyone else is a denizen (citizen being the feel-good PR term).
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 3, Informative) by isostatic on Friday January 15 2016, @05:40PM
If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear. [washingtonpost.com]
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday January 15 2016, @06:12PM
Geez, why are people so happy to call out the SWAT team for stupid stuff like "omg these guys may be growing pot."
Do pot growers tend to be heavily armed with assault rifles or something? Or does Johnny Law just get a stiffy from busting down people's doors?
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Friday January 15 2016, @06:42PM
When you have an expensive hammer taking a huge chunk of your yearly budget, you'd better start finding enough nails.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday January 15 2016, @07:21PM
Or, y'know, you could get rid of the hammer and just save the money :P
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday January 15 2016, @07:26PM
What would happen if a nail showed up? Are you soft on nails?
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday January 15 2016, @09:57PM
Borrow your neighbor's hammer
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday January 15 2016, @10:10PM
The whole house could fall apart in the time it takes to get their hammer.
is that what you want, you evilmonger? The complete downfall of everything we ever built, at the hands of some rogue nail, because we were to weak to maintain our own full-scale hammering capabilities?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 15 2016, @10:16PM
Worse than the house falling down, if we sell off the hammer, the wife will start to question our other tool purchases! Nobody's touching my Dewalt biscuit joiner. I really liked it the one time I used it.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday January 15 2016, @11:12PM
That's an actual thing?!
The burning question is whether they use American or British biscuits ("cookies").
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday January 15 2016, @11:09PM
Yeah, we'd much rather stare at a nail, flexing and raising our hammer, only to find out hours later it was actually a bolt.
...and then hammer it anyway just for the fuck of it.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"