egafd.com

And never speak out in case of demotion !sad!
!

No. Something similar was mooted under the Labour government but not passed.

Needless to say at the time the Tories and Lib Dems were dead against the measures e.g.

The shadow home secretary at the time, Chris Grayling, said the government had "built a culture of surveillance which goes far beyond counter terrorism and serious crime".

Come back Mr Orwell, you were a moderate compared to this lot!! No doubt anything dodgy will be flashed to the NSA who will then come over to your house and take you to a supermax US prison for 20 years without trial.
Then again if everyone got together and sent the text Obama Al Qaeda once a day that would overload their systems!

Just go and use encrypted email - you send emails as normal but with your information as an encrypted document - been doing it for ages and it pisses em off as they cant see what you are saying.....

your recip has the unlock code that you pass and then they can use similar software to encode thier reply.

no one will ever know what you are saying and it would take them a good 50 years to decipher what you were talking about.

william wrote:

> Just go and use encrypted email - you send emails as normal but
> with your information as an encrypted document - been doing it
> for ages and it pisses em off as they cant see what you are
> saying.....


Nice try, but sadly that won't work. They will still see who you're sending the email to, which is what the legislation is designed to allow them to do. Content is irrelevant as it's outside the scope of the proposed legislation. The idea -- once the necessary warrant has been obtained -- is to see who you're emailing, how often you do it and at what times. Your suggestion does nothing to address the issue at all.

Arginald Valleywater's comment is also irrelevant. You can't overload any systems because a warrant has to be in place first before they can check on you. They can only overload their own systems by applying for more warrants than they can handle. There's nothing that Arginald Valleywater or anyone else can do to overload any systems and his suggestion therefore does nothing to address the issue.

"Just go and use encrypted email - you send emails as normal but with your information as an encrypted document - been doing it for ages and it pisses em off as they cant see what you are saying....."

It is worth pointing out that the bill apparently will cover phone calls, texts, web usage as well as emails.

Secondly, the bill will not allow GCHQ to access the content of emails, calls or messages without a warrant.

However, intelligence officers would be allowed without a warrant to identify who an individual or group is in contact with, how often and for how long. They would also be able to see which websites someone had visited.

So for example, if you are regularly communicating with some character who, unbeknownst possibly to you, is already under surveillance or if you are accessing a website which has links to illegal material for whatever reason, you would inevitably come under scrutiny I would have thought.

And in that situation, the fact that you are using encryption software would be a bit like pressing an alarm button in GCHQ or wherever.

But nothing to worry about, I am sure there would be no cases of mistaken arrest and charging!!!!

And if you were unfortunate enough to get extradited to the USA you could always plead guilty to avoid a 300 year sentence, a bit like the Nat West 3.

"Content is irrelevant as it's outside the scope of the proposed legislation. The idea -- once the necessary warrant has been obtained -- is to see who you're emailing, how often you do it and at what times."

I am not sure if this is correct. We will not be sure one way or another I suspect until details of proposed legislation are announced.

However, my understanding and the understanding that the BBC News article seems to back up is that, without a warrant, intelligence officers will be able to access info about which websites an individual is accessing and which individuals/groups you are emailing.

If the content of phone calls, emails etc then needs to be accessed, a warrant is required.

Yes that is true David Johnson, there are no certainties about the proposed legislation until the proposals are actually published. However, I think it's safe to say that a warrant would definitely be required if content was within the scope of the legislation -- although the new law may not be changing as much as some people may think, as under existing legislation the police can already get a search warrant and examine your computer to see what emails you've been sending.

There was a picture of Milliband in the paper entitled "An April Fools Joke"
Larf, I nearly wet meself.