Slashdot Mirror
UK Wants Authority To Serve Warrants In U.S. (usatoday.com)
schwit1 writes with this news, as reported by USA Today: British and U.S. officials have been negotiating a plan that could allow British authorities to directly serve wiretap orders on U.S. communications companies in criminal and national security inquiries, U.S. officials confirmed Thursday. The talks are aimed at allowing British authorities access to a range of data, from interceptions of live communications to archived emails involving British suspects, according to the officials, who are not authorized to comment publicly. ... Under the proposed plan, British authorities would not have access to records of U.S. citizens if they emerged in the British investigations. Congressional approval would be required of any deal negotiated by the two countries.
That didn't take long.
British authorities would not have access to records of U.S. citizens if they emerged in the British investigations.
Riiiiight. They would never do that and hand it over to its Five Eyes brethren in the NSA. That's just crazy talk!
[nt]
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
... the British also want to issue tax stamps on tea.
>> British and U.S. officials have been negotiating a plan...Congressional approval would be required of any deal negotiated
Do these US officials report to the executive branch? Then why isn't the headline something like, "Obama happy to bend over for British wiretapping of US citizens" or some-such? This stuff doesn't happen in a vacuum...
I guess this isn't the Hope and Change you voted for.
So the "you tap our citizens and we'll tap yours to get around our respective legal limits" codified in law?
So instead of UK going to US Judge, it bypass the judiciary and skips straight to the telecoms company or ISP? And so no judge says "hold on that's illegal here" and stops it . The company is supposed to stop it based on foreign law it has no knowledge of?
And UK has a joke of a law called RIPA which replaces warrants with letters written by police officers, its so lax that EX policemen write these letters on behalf of copyright agencies and the recipient has no way of determining the legality of the request (this was done in a private prosecution against Anton Vickerman for linking to infringing content, an ex policeman wrote a letter which appeared to make a RIPA request, however he was an *ex* policeman and thus a RIPA was not legal). I assume that this would equally apply to these demands for US data?
Then there's an extradition treaty between UK and US. US can demand people be extradited without showing any evidence that the particular person committed the particular crime. Whereas USA requires the UK provide the evidence showing that the person committed the crime (exactly as it should be). The latter part permits legal challenges to bullshit claims, the former allows only worthless 'procedural' challenges. Being innocent is no defense if no evidence of any guilt is ever submitted on extradition!
That extradition treaty has so far worked. When US demands someone we don't think should be extradited, such a stink is kicked up in the media that the Home Office finds it political suicide to extradite them. But its a political/press protection, *NOT* a legal/judicial protections. The law is one sided and has not been fixed.
bit by bit. convergence amongst western powers first. asia next. the rest later. not so alex jonesy anymore.
Sure, the War of 1812 was a fiasco, but are we looking for round 2?
Oh, please, the US has been demanding this same kind of crap around the world since 2001.
This security stuff is now the keys to the kingdom, you can undermine sovereignty and violate laws in secret if you put on your fucking puppy dog face and says "because, security".
The US government is actively involved in doing the shit to the rest of the world, so don't look to us for any sympathy. Because an awful lot of Americans seem to think it's just fine when you do it to the rest of the world.
You're damned right this doesn't happen in a vacuum.
But if you think the US hasn't been demanding the ability to wiretap others, or just going ahead and doing it, you've been willfully ignorant to the last bunch of years.
Only now that it's happening to you, you're suddenly outraged.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Those headlines only appear for the very small number of basically irrelevant issues that the two major parties actually disagree on.
Because the inconvenient truth for the Obama-haters is that this has been going on officially since ECHELON in the 80's.
https://youtu.be/hDoGqZUHVEI
You are welcome on my lawn.
I thought our forefathers fought Britain to be free of them? WTF happened?
We're only pulling the same shit you pull on us. Reciprocity's a bitch.
Just say no to a Police State. The UK are as close to a deranged "Politically Correct" Police State now as when Kings roamed the land and killed with impunity. Except this time they favor those who would destroy their self-loathing asses over their own. It's an island of mentally ill people. Period.
Both nations are part of Interpol which was established for exactly this purpose. If they have a problem with the established organization then they need to reform that intermediary body for the betterment of all nations involved. That way it's not just the US you gain better cooperation with, but the other 188 countries as well. If you can't get the other member nations to agree with your proposals, then maybe your ideas aren't that great after all. This "alternative" of sidestepping established practices and micromanaging jurisdictional treaties between every god damn nation under the sun, just because you can't stand criticism from your peers, is nothing short of ridiculous.
Or maybe this has more to do with Interpol's charter forbidding their intervention in political matters #tinfoilhat.
If they are going to do that, then why not have the United States apply to join the Commonwealth? We were part of the British Empire ... once.
--- Andy West http://andywest.org
1940s, Echelon was originally a deal between the USA, the UK and Australia.
They all have inconvenient laws banning their spooks from spying on their own citizens. So they all spy on each others citizens and exchange information. Formally agreed sense 1945, no doubt it was happening during the war (but mostly the laws were just ignored).
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Oh, you're upset because another country is claiming the rights to come here and fuck with our shit? The nerve of them!
But why not....we get to fly drones over other people's countries and drop bombs on them, a warrant seems like a kiss on the lips compared to that, right?
Now you know how they feel.
Look, if we can send FBI agents to any country in the world to arrest people, tell me why, exactly, other countries shouldn't be allowed to do the EXACT same thing here? Yeah, it just doesn't seem "right", does it?
Don't get me wrong- I'm against it. But you can't on one hand say it's okay for us to do it but not for the UK to do, now can you?
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
I was going to bring that up too.
I guess the difference now is that they can go directly to a provider and demand information rather than try to catch a glimpse of it.
to the realities of other countries.
Ever felt it might be scary to be in the UK but extradited to Sweden for one thing only to possibly be extradited to the US for another?
But back on track...when was the last time US citizens or Russian etc have had to respect laws in other countries? -so far it's been optional.
Because we only elect spineless old farts that care about their pockets more than the people they are elected to SERVE.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
The norm in diplomatic relations is a tit-for-tat reciprocity: When one nation allows another the do something, almost always the first nation allows the second to do the same back.
So my question is whether US negotiators have secured the right for US police to serve warrants on UK ISPs? If not, why not? Why give it away? Just because the EU might have a cow?
Leftists?
Ignorant fuck.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
UK has been playing the wannabe EU version of America lately, wanting to close borders, wanting to revoke immigrant rights, remove welfare rights and whatnot. They have imposed several new laws to monitor their citizens, and they're becoming more and more like an closed-border socialist version of America every passing month. Now they also want rights in the U.S.A. LOL, I can't stop laughing at this, but this is so pitiful.
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
The alphabet mafia must be salivating over this. They could do quid-pro quo or outright buy support from British Intel. to circumnavigate and restriction and any oversight.
What the UK wants and what the UK security services want is not in anyway the same thing.
Something something revolution something.
I'm a Brit but this makes me just as uncomfortable as the US government watching me.
Foreign warrants will go unanswered / unaknowledged. We will not comply with them on any level.
The first response in this thread is "So it begins..." but no, so it does not begin.
The UK wants this (and that part is true) and USATODAY ("TV in print") is happy
to tell us. It's not a proposal. It's not a treaty. It's not a draft-anything. It's as much
of a NON-STARTER as you can get. It's USATODAY Friday Filler.
However, this is not something Congress can allow, the President can sign, and
the law be born. It is against the sovereign principles of a free nation, against
international law, and against the DoI and the COTUS.
It won't happen. Continuing to cry about it maybe happening is making more
noise than the deaf "oof" the nonstory would have made.
Thanks, Timothy! Slashdot's new regime continues to show its stellar qualities
of approving utter crapola for the front page!
Ehud
By US standards, he is.
It's all relative.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.
Just ship all dissidents in Oceania to Airstrip One Ministry of Love for processing
Because if you RTFA, it actually specifically excludes US citizens.
I'm not crazy enough to stand up with a gun and *protest* government violations of my rights- but I support those who do even where they don't agree with me on what any of that means. For instance I love how everybody bitches about the government pulling all sorts of crazy stuff like this and yet when other crazy people stand up with guns against this BS we criticize them. >>>>>> Bundy militants .... etc
There is no chance it in hell we're going to get the masses to stand up although I think there is hope in getting people to organize against this shit. However we need to organize *in one place*. Spread out those who care have little impact. Focusing on a single low population state >>> www.freestateproject.org there is a chance. Maybe. It's going to take a lot more than 20,000 people however it's a dammed good start.
Did we forget Bunker HIll?
gstoddart why are you even attempting to speak? Everything your foul mouth spews forth is purest garbage or unoriginal. We realize your mongoloid imbecile brain is taxed extraordinarily when you attempt writing but it taxes even the best hieroglyphics experts to make sense of your scribblings! Please stfu. The only thing that enrages us is that idiots like yourself are given technology to attempt to impart your moronic attempts at idiocy upon the rest of us!
Could save all this trouble, cost and annoyance by just banning Muslims, yes I'm serious, and yes it's possible.
Wait what you really really mean is "OBUMA...Ok we've been doing this to you brits for so long we guessed you would want something similar in return well lets talks about it...Oh and BTW I wont be here soon so good luck with that suckers"
By US standards, he is.
By US standards, everyone is.
It's all relative.
Yep.
Given that the details of the program would be classified, I'm not sure what "Congressional approval" actually means. Does that mean Congress has to pass a bill, or does that mean that someone on the Intelligence Oversight Committee says "uh huh" and shakes a hand?