Slashdot Mirror
Amnesty International Seeks Explanation For 'Absolutely Shocking' Surveillance
Mark Wilson writes: A court recently revealed via email that the UK government had been spying on Amnesty International. GCHQ had put Amnesty under surveillance — despite this having previously been denied — and now the human rights organization wants answers.
In a letter to the UK Prime Minister David Cameron, Amnesty International asks for an explanation for the surveillance. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal's (IPT) email made it clear that GCHQ had been intercepting, accessing and storing communications, something that Amnesty International's Secretary General, Salil Shetty believes 'makes it vividly clear that mass surveillance has gone too far'.
In a letter to the UK Prime Minister David Cameron, Amnesty International asks for an explanation for the surveillance. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal's (IPT) email made it clear that GCHQ had been intercepting, accessing and storing communications, something that Amnesty International's Secretary General, Salil Shetty believes 'makes it vividly clear that mass surveillance has gone too far'.
exactly
amnesty international probably think they're special, but the uk government really doesn't give a shit about anyone other than themselves. only the alleged peadophiles in the house of lords need their privacy protected
The problem with slashdot is that most of its users were bullied and stuffed into lockers as kids!
Do you even know what organisation you're talking about? Overwhelming majority of Amnesty's work is outside modern Western world. And they pick up "fights" with targets that are overwhelmingly more powerful than their organisation routinely. It's their mission to do so.
but the uk government really doesn't give a shit about anyone other than themselves
That is missing the point somewhat. Secret services want to watch over absolutely everything - because they can. Their governments seem to have largely abdicated control, not least because then the decisions on what to spy on and what to ignore could then be held against the politicians responsible. GCHQ seem to consider any inland NGO and most foreign countries to be targets but a lot of that is absence external of controls.
The E German Stasi *owned* the country, and had leading figures in all three W German agencies. A significant proportion of that country's budget was spent on the Stasi. Did it help them when Gorbachov decided not to stand in the way of reunification?
The U.S. are gathering more and more data, hell - they even knew about the 9.11 group ahead of time (and had been warned by the Germans) but did it help?
Look at Tunisia a couple of weeks ago, GCHQ were so busy spying on AI that they missed the big one. As if AI are going to mount an attack of that kind.
Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
Why spy on Amnesty? They try to help political prisoners and such.
That is a very good reason for most intelligence agencies to spy on Amnesty: Amnesty has a lot of contacts on the ground in many oppressive countries. These contacts could be recruited as spies by intelligence agencies, sold out to their local government, spied upon to learn of coming activities, leaned on to start certain activities, or something else entirely. Some of these people could even know some of the dirty secrets of the intelligence agencies and their governments. Unfortunately, their spying is likely to make it harder for Amnesty to do their work, and significantly increases the risk of their contacts. In my opinion, the spying should stop.
The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
Charities can have specific purposes without it being an attack on other charitable causes.
Anyway, the proper term isn't "This Septic Isle," it's "The British Paedoph-isles."
Posturing histrionics.
Have gchq or other intelligence organizations ever used the data inappropriately?
Yes. Collecting it is sufficient to constitute inappropriate use.
Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
Incineration is much more effective!
Some of Brittains closest allies are brutal despots. Keeping Amnesty International from "Rocking the Boat" directly supports an ally, and therefore supports national security. Yes this is immoral and illegal, but you can't pretend it isn't in the countries best interest.
To suggest that such organizations are somehow morally above being spied-upon
Of course I suggest they're above being spied on. Everyone is morally above being spied on unless there's some sort of warrant or actualy cause. If you disagree that people aren't above being spied on, then would you be happy for me to come over and install a surveillance camera in your bathroom and bedroom?
Sorry, if I'm in charge of security for a church, I'm still frisking the nuns, because to do otherwise would be irresponsible.
Poe's law strikes again. I literally can't tell if you're being satirical or stark raving mad. You're not cold fjord, at least (then I'd know for sure).
SJW n. One who posts facts.
you can't pretend it isn't in the countries best interest.
Since when is the government the country? It might be in their best interests. I don't see why it's in mine. Then again, my interests don't include making as much money as I can and to hell with the consequences.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Mass surveillance is when they listen in on everyone, including you, me and Amnesty. If they just tap into Amnesty, it's targeted surveillance. It might still be wrong, but it's not the same. I'm not against targeted surveillance, provided that there are clear rules in place that get independently verified and rigorously enforced (which of course is never the case).
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...