Slashdot Mirror


British Foreign Secretary on Surveillance Worries: '"Law Abiding Citizens Have N

Bruce66423 writes "The government minister in charge of GCHQ, the UK's equivalent of the NSA, has used those immortal words, 'Only terrorists, criminals and spies should fear secret activities of the British and US intelligence agencies.' From the article: '...In an interview on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show on Sunday, Mr Hague refused to say whether the British government knew of the existence of Prism before it emerged last week. “I can’t confirm or deny in public what Britain knows about and what Britain doesn’t, for obvious reasons,” he said. However, he implied that the revelations had not taken him by surprise.'" While many are concerned about the reach of PRISM overseas, the Finnish Foreign Minister says he plans to continue using Outlook for email.

18 of 404 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah, right! by whoever57 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Only terrorists, criminals and spies should fear secret activities of the British and US intelligence agencies.

    That statement might have more credibility if it were not for the well documented use of RIPA powers for things unconnected to terrorism and serious crime.

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    1. Re:Yeah, right! by Internetuser1248 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Law abiding governments have nothing to worry about from whistleblowers. Only war criminals, the corrupt and the dishonest should fear the activities of the media.

    2. Re:Yeah, right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wait till the EDL, BNP UKIP coalition gets in and there new STASI like security apparatus gets hold of the graph on connections and starts rounding people up.

    3. Re:Yeah, right! by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, and you see here's the thing. Even if it's an ostensibly democratic government setting up this stuff to combat terrorism, if the next government turns out to be hard right racist fascists like the BNP, you've just put all that power into their hands. Unless you can guarantee 100% that a party like the national socialists will never get into power, these tools should not be constructed for whatever purpose.

    4. Re:Yeah, right! by Mitreya · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Only terrorists, criminals and spies should fear secret activities of the British and US intelligence agencies.

      That statement might have more credibility if it were not for the well documented use of RIPA powers for things unconnected to terrorism and serious crime.

      It is all in the definition, my friend.

      Only terrorists/criminals/spies should fear secret activities of the intelligence agencies, because once you are target by such an agency, you are a terrorist (and possibly a spy or a criminal too).

      Just like drone attacks have no collateral damage because anyone they actually kill is effectively redefined to have been a terrorist all along.

    5. Re:Yeah, right! by YoungManKlaus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      5 points and still underrated

    6. Re:Yeah, right! by sosume · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "hard right racist fascists like the BNP" = right wing
      "a party like the national socialists" = left wing
      so you're arguing that neither left nor right oriented parties should ever get access to these tools when in power. May I add the center?

    7. Re:Yeah, right! by NettiWelho · · Score: 5, Funny

      Law abiding governments have nothing to worry about from whistleblowers. Only war criminals, the corrupt and the dishonest should fear the activities of the media.

      if(filterhits>flaggingthreshold){ //Subversive thoughts have been detected.
      addFlag("Internetuser1248 (1787630)", reeduacationeesList);
      alertAgent(availableAgent());
      }

    8. Re:Yeah, right! by MrMickS · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "hard right racist fascists like the BNP" = right wing
      "a party like the national socialists" = left wing
      so you're arguing that neither left nor right oriented parties should ever get access to these tools when in power. May I add the center?

      I think he's implying that extreme parties of either persuasion would use the laws to enforce their ideology. Any group that believes that they are right to the exclusion of all other viewpoints is a danger and should be feared in power.

      --
      You may think me a tired, old, cynic. I'd have to disagree about the tired bit.
    9. Re:Yeah, right! by davester666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How else will we be able to find everybody infringing MPAA and RIAA copyright-protected material?

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    10. Re:Yeah, right! by xenobyte · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Denmark has the same issue. We have a law allowing extradition to foreign countries of danish nationals in case of terrorism, which was enacted post 9/11 (November 2011 if I remember correctly). It has been used exactly once - not to extradite a terrorist but to extradite a woman who used to have a US-national boyfriend who smuggled drugs. She was charged with knowing about his activities and not reporting it - a very minor crime, and yet the danish courts, all the way to the supreme court - allowed the extradition. Fortunately for her, the crime she was charged with fell for the statute of limitation almost before the extradition proceedings began (i.e. a huge waste of time and money) so she could return as a free woman.

      But it's a huge problem that a law specifically meant for terrorists were used in a relatively minor criminal case in a crime barely punishable by more than a fine here. So much for the terrorist angle.

      --
      "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
  2. It's true. by stanIyb · · Score: 5, Funny

    Think about it. Everyone knows that the government is made up of perfect angels who would never abuse their powers or make mistakes, so what do innocent people have to fear? Nothing! History has shown us time and time again that corrupt governments simply don't and can't exist, and if you say otherwise, you just have an overactive imagination.

    I say our next move should be to install government-owned surveillance equipment in everyone's houses. After all, if you have nothing to hide, what do you have to fear? People could be committing crimes in their houses, so it's justified.

  3. Just because I have nothing to hide... by AvderTheTerrible · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ..does not mean you have any business going through my life with a fine tooth comb.

    The "Nothing to Hide" argument is a fallacy that falls apart upon examination:
    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110524/00084614407/privacy-is-not-secrecy-debunking-if-youve-got-nothing-to-hide-argument.shtml
    https://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/

  4. Please, please, everyone settle down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's nothing to raise a Führer over!

  5. TSIA by adolf · · Score: 5

    British Foreign Secretary on Surveillance Worries: '"Law Abiding Citizens Have N

    What is N? Where can I get rid of N? Can I buy more N at the store? Should I be worried if I have N?

    FFS, editors. FFS.

    *head in hands*

  6. Anthony Weiner Disagrees by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a conspiracy theory that a good friend of mine passed along. I have no reason to believe it is true, but I think it can still illustrate the problem with that attitude.

    First off, to recap, Anthony Weiner was a member of congress from New York City. He accidentally tweeted a "calvin klein underwear ad" of himself on his official twitter feed. Within minutes he deleted the tweet, but the damage was done. He ended up resigning and the seat he held, which had been held by democrats for something like 80 years, went to a republican.

    It turned out Weiner had two twitter accounts, a personal one and the official one. He had been regularly using the private account to send suggestive photos to women across the country. Not illegal, but douchey. Although for all we the public know, his (brilliant and hot) wife was fine with it, maybe they had a look-but-don't-touch agreement. Whatever it was, it was their business alone.

    Now, just imagine that somebody at the NSA who was "friendly" to the republicans decided to do a little checking into Weiner and discovered what he was doing on his "private" account. Then they logged into his official twitter account using some back-door or even just something sloppy like a cookie they sniffed off the wire from his own most recent login. Once logged in, they "accidentally" posted the picture and then deleted it a few minutes later.

    Viola, career ruined and republicans get a chance to pick up a seat they would never have had a chance at if nobody had been snooping on Weiner.

    Like I said at the start, I have zero reason to believe that is actually what happened. He probably just forgot what account he was logged into - all the blood had left his brain for other parts of his body. But, what matters here is just how plausible this theory is. The only thing standing in the way of this sort of corruption is the personal integrity of basically everyone with access to these programs at the NSA. Imagine just how easily this kind of ubiquitous surveillance apparatus can be turned to political corruption. We have way too much of that already, no need to make it any easier.

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  7. Show me your e-mail of the last 10 years Mr Hague by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    After all, you, as a law abiding citizen, have nothing to fear, right ?

  8. old crap by Tom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah, that quote is really, really old and gets used by politicians a lot.

    Lately, here in Germany, we've started throwing it back at them whenever they are hiding something from us. Like who gives them how much money or which companies they work for after their term, or who paid their campaign, or indeed their last holiday.

    The "if you have nothing to hide..." should be told to them a lot more often, because they've been abusing it for a long, long time.

    Also, since we know that sexual favours are as successful in swaying people as financial incentives, I would like a full record of who my politicians have been sleeping with during their terms. As there are more lies in this area than in any other, we should have 24/7 surveilance and automated reporting. What? You don't have anything to hide, do you?

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org