<\/p>\n
Argues that \u201cHate speech\u201d definition threshold should be set much lower<\/strong> The British Home Secretary went on record yesterday to echo other ministers\u2019 calls<\/a> for vastly expanded government surveillance powers in the wake of last week\u2019s murder of a solider in the streets of London.<\/p>\n Despite the fact that the suspects were already known to MI5 for eight years<\/a>, and that one of them had even been offered a job<\/a> as an informant by the intelligence agency, Home Secretary Theresa May urged Sunday that it is \u201cessential\u201d that the security services have greater access to everyone\u2019s communications data.<\/p>\n \u201cIntelligence agencies need access,\u201d May told the BBC\u2019s Andrew Marr Show, further stating that she will seek to resurrect the Communications Data Bill, otherwise known as the \u201csnooper\u2019s charter\u201d; legislation that was shelved recently over invasion of privacy fears.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019ve always been clear that access to communications data is essential for the law enforcement agencies and intelligence agencies.\u201d May stated.<\/p>\n \u201cThere is a reducing capability in relation to access to communications data and as far as I\u2019m concerned I think this is a very important thing we need to ensure we are giving our law enforcement agencies and intelligence agencies access to the tools that they need to fight crime, paedophiles and terrorists.\u201d May added.<\/p>\n The Home Secretary also argued that \u201chate speech\u201d laws should be altered to set the threshold for such rhetoric at a much lower level.<\/p>\n \u201cWe need to look\u2026 at the question of whether perhaps we need to have banning orders, to ban organizations that don\u2019t meet the threshold for proscription. We need to look at organizations outside government as well as what government is doing. Whether we\u2019ve got the right processes, the right rules in place in relation to what is being beamed into people\u2019s homes,\u201d she told the BBC.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n The alleged killer, Michael Adebolajo, had been recorded at multiple extremist protests and events by the security services, and had been deported to Britain after he appeared in court in Mombasa on terrorism related charges<\/a> in November 2010. Anti-terror police in Kenya have accused the British of ignoring their warnings<\/a> that Adebolajo was a dangerous jihadist radical who attempted to join the ranks of the Al Shabaab terrorist group in Somalia.<\/p>\n Despite these glaring intelligence failures, government ministers are now arguing that British intelligence do not have enough<\/em> access to potential extremists\u2019 communications data. They are using their own intelligence errors to push for legislation that would see the creation of a dragnet surveillance database, allowing police and intelligence agencies to effectively monitor the communications of everyone in the country.<\/p>\n The so-called \u201csnoopers\u2019 charter\u201d, a proposed data mine of everyone\u2019s internet and phone usage, was blocked last month by The Deputy Prime Minister, and Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, who cited \u201csignificant reduction in personal privacy\u201d.<\/p>\n However, Conservatives in government intentionally left the door open<\/a> for a revival of the legislation.<\/p>\n Former Labour Home Secretary Alan Johnson also repeated sentiments he first aired last week, noting on the same BBC show that \u201cWe need to get this on the statute book before the next general election and I think it is absolutely crucial.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cIndeed I think it is a resignation issue for a Home Secretary if the Cabinet do not support her in this central part of what the security services do.\u201d Johnson added.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Former Met Police counter-terrorism chief Peter Clarke also told Sky News that new surveillance legislation should be enacted \u201cas quickly as possible\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cI fully subscribe to the views expressed by some very eminent people\u2026 The intelligence agencies and police should be given the opportunity to keep up with modern technology, which is all this bill is about.\u201d Clarke said.<\/p>\n Liberal Democrat peer Lord Carlile, a former reviewer of terrorism legislation, also told Sky News that the Deputy Prime Minister made a mistake in blocking the snooping bill.<\/p>\n \u201cAll the bill tried to do was to update what is already being done day-by-day and throughout Europe.\u201d Carlile said.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n UK Privacy advocates have launched a scathing attack on the ministers\u2019 proposals.<\/p>\n \u201cIt is remarkable for politicians to be jumping to legislation to monitor the entire country when all the evidence to date shows this horrific attack would not have been prevented by the communications data bill,\u201d said Emma Carr of the UK\u2019s Big Brother Watch in a statement released on Sunday.<\/p>\n Carr further argued that vastly expanded surveillance laws would hinder, rather than help with anti-terror operations, noting that it \u201cwould divert resources from focused surveillance operations at a time when the agencies are already struggling to cope with the volume of information available.\u201d<\/p>\n Civil liberties campaigner Nick Pickles agreed:<\/p>\n \u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013-<\/p>\n Steve Watson <\/strong>is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones\u2019 Infowars.com<\/a>, and Prisonplanet.com<\/a>. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.<\/em><\/p>\n <!– <\/p>\n –><\/p>\n This article was posted: Monday, May 27, 2013 at 8:20 am<\/p>\n Tags: big brother<\/a>, domestic spying<\/a>, terrorism<\/a><\/p>\n
Steve Watson<\/strong>
Infowars.com
May 27, 2013<\/p>\n
\n
\n <\/p>\n
\n
<!– this is where we need to show the related articles <\/p>\n