Britain Has Passed the 'Most Extreme Surveillance Law Ever Passed in a Democracy' (zdnet.com)

Zack Whittaker, reporting for ZDNet: The UK has just passed a massive expansion in surveillance powers, which critics have called "terrifying" and "dangerous." The new law, dubbed the "snoopers' charter," was introduced by then-home secretary Theresa May in 2012, and took two attempts to get passed into law following breakdowns in the previous coalition government. Four years and a general election later -- May is now prime minister -- the bill was finalized and passed on Wednesday by both parliamentary houses. Civil liberties groups have long criticized the bill, with some arguing that the law will let the UK government "document everything we do online." It's no wonder, because it basically does. The law will force internet providers to record every internet customer's top-level web history in real-time for up to a year, which can be accessed by numerous government departments; force companies to decrypt data on demand -- though the government has never been that clear on exactly how it forces foreign firms to do that that; and even disclose any new security features in products before they launch. Not only that, the law also gives the intelligence agencies the power to hack into computers and devices of citizens (known as equipment interference), although some protected professions -- such as journalists and medical staff -- are layered with marginally better protections. In other words, it's the "most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy," according to Jim Killock, director of the Open Rights Group.

Comments

Re:Thank you...

[stealth_finger]

If not muslims, the Irish, if not the Irish the Russians, if not Russians the Bogeymen.

Re:Truly despicable

[91degrees]

So there isn't a problem of mass bombings and violence?

No. there isn't.

And is this violence coming from a select group of people?

I believe people with strong anti-muslim views tend to be disproportionately represented.

The simplest solution is to say clearly that freedom of expression trumps blasphemy laws. People can say whatever they want about a religion - even if i's considered blasphemous by adherents of that religion.

Yes. Fortunately blasphemy laws were abolished 8 years ago.

And violence, and threat of violence are not acceptable with prison or deportation (if non-citizen) as punishments.

I believe this is the case.

Re:Truly despicable

[Nidi62]

What does either of the above 2 events - both of which happened >50 years ago - have to do w/ immigration to the UK? The creation of Israel did not displace the Arabs, except for those who left on their own to become refugees in other Arab countries, not UK. The creation of India and Pakistan caused a carnage during the movement of Hindus from the Pakistans to India, but did nothing to cause major migration to the UK. So how are those 2 events relevant at all here?

The British, through the Balfour Declaration/the carving up of the Middle East along with the French following WWI and the partition of India essentially laid the groundwork for the present conditions in those countries, leading to fairly significant exoduses. Due to lingering linguistic and cultural familiarity, the logical place for most of these immigrants/refugees is England. Nothing we do today happens in a vacuum.