Tuesday, 28 May 2013

Snoopers Charter Will Result In Innocents Being Classified As Undesirables.

When I was a Teenager, I taught my youngest sister  who was about four years old to recite.

Pussy Cat Pussy Cat
Where have you been 
I've been up to London to see the Queen
Pussy Cat Pussy Cat 
What did you do there
I planted a bomb under her chair

It caused some ructions when she repeated it at school, but it was a rather poor and puerile act by myself especially from someone who even then was developing pacifist beliefs and  would be appalled by any act of violence.

Still if I had  the Social Media and the proposed Snoopers Charter had been around then I may have been placed on some list as a suspected terrorist.

The plans first brought forward  by Labour in 2003 and revised by the Tories but blocked by LibDem leader Nick Clegg , are now set to be revised after the atrocity  at Woolwich  could see the Conservatives and Labour Party working together on the Bill to defeat any  Liberal Democrat veto .

My Opposition  plans for a communications bill that would give police and security services access to records of individuals' Internet use. are.

I'm not convinced that it would have prevented the Woolwich attack . The accused were already known to the security agencies and it there have been accusations that at least one of the accused was targeted as a MI5 spy. and who was already clearly in their radar after appearing in a Kenyan cout after being arrested on the Somali border  We need to know the full extent of the security sources  .

Could it be thta they viewd him as a potential informan?

It is clear that the idea of the Communication and Data Bill is much wider than watching suspect Terrorist and will cover everyone on the web. It could be that it will gradually be extended and profiles built up of everyone who is deemed opposed to the establishment . This would include, Socialist, Nationalists. Greens,  Republicans  (which all would cover me) etc.

People who may be opposed to what the Majority in the Westminster Parliament think and may use strong language but would never consider committing an act of violence against another Individual or the State apparatus.

Security surveillance could well be so wide spread that they miss the real terrorist as they investigate the  comments of people who may not share mainstream opinion but have no intention of supporting let alone committing acts of terrorism.

It means that some will be condemned of Thought Crime and comments they made on some website twisted against them.

The government will claim that "the innocent have nothing to fear." But the innocent always have something to fear especially from those who tell them they have nothing to fear"


2 comments:

  1. Lib Dems once again fighting the good (unpopular) fight against the other two main parties.

    They should be hugely congratulated for stopping the bill in the first place. Let's hope they can stop it for good.

    ReplyDelete
  2. maen_tramgwydd28 May 2013 at 12:07

    Information is power. The more information a government has, the more control it can exert. A greater level of control necessarily diminishes our freedom.

    The freedom of 60 million people needs to be balanced against the occasional murder of a British soldier.

    The existing anti-terrorism legislation on the statute book is draconian giving virtually unlimited powers to the police and security services.

    The Home Office has been deemed unfit for purpose in the past, and I wouldn't trust any British politician to protect my rights or liberties if it came to the crunch as they are a self-serving corrupt incompetent lot. Just think of the choice we have:

    Cameron
    Clegg or
    Miliband

    This is an elective dictatorship

    ReplyDelete