Theresa May says the internet must now be regulated

[Wales-Bales]

Theresa May says the internet must now be regulated following London Bridge terror attack

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7771896.html

[Organ Morgan.]

We need a national ID card scheme for everyone aged 16 and above. That card would have to be produced when demanded by a police officer or other state security agent. Failure to do so would result in a maximum £10,000 fine and/or mandatory two years clink. Citizens, their homes and business premises should be searched at the discretion of any authorised agent without the need for a warrant.

Fill the skies with surveillance drones. Issue an Internet Licence. No-one without one will be able to legally access the web. Anyone who visits an unapproved site shall have that licence withdrawn for life and be summarily taken to a cell at their nearest police station to receive a jolly good kicking.

[Colonel Cærdiffi]

Spot on. If only the Department of Work and Pensions had access to all my emails, none of this terrorism would be happening.

[NYCBlue]

Sounds just like something from House of Cards. The Netflix version.

[Nick]

Spot on. If only the Department of Work and Pensions had access to all my emails, none of this terrorism would be happening.

No, but perhaps if they had access to Salman Abedi's e mails there wouldn't be 22 people dead in Manchester now.

[Wales-Bales]

No, but perhaps if they had access to Salman Abedi's e mails there wouldn't be 22 people dead in Manchester now.

Terrorism predates the internet.

In fact, you would have to be pretty stupid to use the internet to plan anything untoward.

[Colonel Cærdiffi]

No, but perhaps if they had access to Salman Abedi's e mails there wouldn't be 22 people dead in Manchester now.

Yes and perhaps if we all had a policeman in our homes listening to our conversations then the same would be true.

[Organ Morgan.]

No, but perhaps if they had access to Salman Abedi's e mails there wouldn't be 22 people dead in Manchester now.

They did have access to his emails. Also to yours, mine and everyone else's. We have Edward Snowden to thank for letting us know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempora

We should all be immensely proud that our government invests so much of its time and our money watching everything we do for our safety and protection. Those who complain about the trifling issue of consent are trouble-making nut jobs who ought to spend more time watching great reality TV shows.

[Croesy Blue]

No, but perhaps if they had access to Salman Abedi's e mails there wouldn't be 22 people dead in Manchester now.

He was already on a watch list so I doubt it would have made a difference.

Id rather not give up my civil liberties thanks. That's the one thing terrorist attacks achieve is people allowing the government to rule by fear.

[Wales-Bales]

Who said May didn't have any policies besides Brexit. This seems like a pretty big one, the global suppression of free speach!

[Colonel Cærdiffi]

Who said May didn't have any policies besides Brexit. This seems like a pretty big one, the global suppression of free speach!

We should impeech!

[Heathblue]

"When you give up liberty for security, you end up with neither"
Benjamin Franklin

[jon1959]

Who said May didn't have any policies besides Brexit. This seems like a pretty big one, the global suppression of free speach!

It is big. It's bigger than banning chris!

[William Treseder]

We need a national ID card scheme for everyone aged 16 and above. That card would have to be produced when demanded by a police officer or other state security agent. Failure to do so would result in a maximum £10,000 fine and/or mandatory two years clink. Citizens, their homes and business premises should be searched at the discretion of any authorised agent without the need for a warrant.

Fill the skies with surveillance drones. Issue an Internet Licence. No-one without one will be able to legally access the web. Anyone who visits an unapproved site shall have that licence withdrawn for life and be summarily taken to a cell at their nearest police station to receive a jolly good kicking.

What's your answer to tackling terrorism?

[Colonel Cærdiffi]

She is talking bollox on this one.

Whatsapp encrypted end to end. Programs like truecrypt etc than encrypt a hard drive that would take months if at all to crack. The cyber caliphate is alive and well - and it's only thanks to groups like Anonymous that sites get tracked and taken down. Add on top of that people like that kid in Cardiff with his usb cuff links encrypted with various how to videos etc. There is no clear or easy to 'regulate' the internet.

Proxies, VPNs, the TOR network - she may as well not bother - even if she forces all ISP's to monitor traffic - that would still have little effect.

It almost as if they're using fear as an excuse to lessen innocent people's civil liberties. They wouldn't do that, would they? Just lie to us like that?

[City123]

She is talking bollox on this one.

Whatsapp encrypted end to end. Programs like truecrypt etc than encrypt a hard drive that would take months if at all to crack. The cyber caliphate is alive and well - and it's only thanks to groups like Anonymous that sites get tracked and taken down. Add on top of that people like that kid in Cardiff with his usb cuff links encrypted with various how to videos etc. There is no clear or easy to 'regulate' the internet.

Proxies, VPNs, the TOR network - she may as well not bother - even if she forces all ISP's to monitor traffic - that would still have little effect.

Agreed, but there are plenty of people who don't understand the internet and would go along with this

[Organ Morgan.]

What's your answer to tackling terrorism?

I'd go for the source. Cut off its head if you will. That means May returning to Saudi Arabia to tell them they must stop funding and arming ISIS & co, or else. What do you think of that idea?

[jon1959]

I'd go for the source. Cut off its head if you will. That means May returning to Saudi Arabia to tell them they must stop funding and arming ISIS & co, or else. What do you think of that idea?

Or else what? She'll stop selling them weapons of mass destruction?

I don't disagree with that, but it won't stop a few groups of fanatics or brainwashed loners using knives and vehicles or even home-made bombs to kill and maim in the UK.

[William Treseder]

I'd go for the source. Cut off its head if you will. That means May returning to Saudi Arabia to tell them they must stop funding and arming ISIS & co, or else. What do you think of that idea?

Depends what (the or else) implies.

[William Treseder]

It almost as if they're using fear as an excuse to lessen innocent people's civil liberties. They wouldn't do that, would they? Just lie to us like that?

If your not doing anything wrong, you've nothing to worry about


5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 ..................,.

[Organ Morgan.]

Depends what (the or else) implies.

One thing it doesn't imply is what she did on her visit there two months ago which was to smile politely at every turn. The bare minimum she should initiate is to try to indict them for crimes against humanity because ISIS, their creation, is responsible for the deaths of umpteen thousands of people, scores of them were British citizens. The Saudi royals are culpable. Trump is on record as stating they were responsible for 9-11 too. But just like May that didn't stop him from crawling to them as President of the USA just a few weeks ago during his trip there. The stench of hypocrisy is quite rancid.

[Kris]

Theresa May says the internet must now be regulated following London Bridge terror attack

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7771896.html

It's really quite amazing, and speaks volumes for a succession of technophobic Governments.

During the recent Wanna Cry attack, Theresa May spoke on Radio 4 about the virus attacking a "WINDOW computer".

Our privacy has already been compromised, all under the veil of fighting extremism. Theresa May claims that the internet creates a safe haven for terrorists. It would all add up perfectly if terrorism only entered these shores following the advent of the internet. In the 70's, 80's and 90's the IRA were able to conduct numerous attacks with little more than a phone box and a few coded messages.

Does regulating the internet prevent 2 or 3 or 8 or 17 people discussing how to attack people in a city?

One of the main reasons why I don't want a huge Tory majority is that it would allow May the freedom to harvest our information for all sorts of purposes, with little opposition because people always believe that a Government acts in a way that protects the innocent.

Try telling that to a number of people who lost their disability benefits over their prolonged usage of Facebook. Or, try telling that to people suspected of crimes whose internet viewing history somehow makes the press.

People will say, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. Imagine, it is March 9th 1973, and 200 people have been injured by a bomb planted by the IRA outside the Old Bailey. The PM, Theresa May, says enough is enough. From now on, we are tapping into all phone calls. The Royal Mail will be opening every envelope and reading it's contents and these contents will be made available to the DSS, DWP, NHS, Ambulance Services and the like. The police will also be taking your diaries, and any other written materials from you house for further examination.

Do people really think that such actions would have prevented a bomb killing 5 British Soldiers two months later? Or would the Intelligence Services have had more information on the Brighton Bombing a decade later?

This is a thinly veiled attempt to monitor citizens. Before too long, internet browsing data will be used in Courts to ascertain a person's character. A person accused of sexual crimes could well have a browsing history that shows they enjoy watching pornography. That will make the news, whether local or national, and public perception will be conditioned to pass judgment on cases where not all details are as well published. Because only perverts watch porn, right? And only junkies buy drugs, and only terrorists read stories of terrorism, and only the workshy would spend hours on Facebook at the cost to the taxpayer.

It is a dangerous ground, it brings into complete possibility that a person somewhere in this country will be judged purely on internet browsing habits. I doubt that it will improve intelligence gathering, it hasn't so far has it? So why does May now think we need more of it? It's because she hasn't a clue what the internet is, she has a number of misconceptions, and she has an agenda.

It's really interesting that, whilst details are still scarce, she has used this tragedy to attack the internet providers. In the immediate aftermath of this attack, within 12 hours of the attack, her focus is on the internet. Why?

This article is about not just about pornography

http://www.newstatesman.com/science-...rn-prohibition

From the same source

http://www.newstatesman.com/science-...ry-powers-bill

[Kris]

She is talking bollox on this one.

Whatsapp encrypted end to end. Programs like truecrypt etc than encrypt a hard drive that would take months if at all to crack. The cyber caliphate is alive and well - and it's only thanks to groups like Anonymous that sites get tracked and taken down. Add on top of that people like that kid in Cardiff with his usb cuff links encrypted with various how to videos etc. There is no clear or easy to 'regulate' the internet.

Proxies, VPNs, the TOR network - she may as well not bother - even if she forces all ISP's to monitor traffic - that would still have little effect.

Agreed, and it offers further proof that she is technically illiterate.

[Mrs Steve R]

Who said May didn't have any policies besides Brexit. This seems like a pretty big one, the global suppression of free speach!

Shhh..

"When you give up liberty for security, you end up with neither"
Benjamin Franklin

He was already on a watch list so I doubt it would have made a difference.

Id rather not give up my civil liberties thanks. That's the one thing terrorist attacks achieve is people allowing the government to rule by fear.

[JDerrida]

Of course terrorism occurred before the Internet, but why make it easier for these assholes to proliferate their hatred and their actions by allowing total freedom on the Internet.
Do most of you who are against her words, have a virus protection on your own PC's ? Why, because it would be downright stoooopid not to protect your PC as much as is possible, even though you can't guarantee you won't get a virus that messes with your PC.
What May is suggesting is to try and protect our citizens in the same way as virus protection, but there's no guarantee that scum won't try to kill our people.
I know what is more important to protect and it's not your PC !!!