Anti UN spying bill

[Denny Crane!]

http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2014/11/rus...k-and-us-dont/

The UN has passed a resolution that asks countries to guarantee the online privacy of their people, also urging governments to put some sort of compensation scheme in place to offer "an effective remedy" for those who have had their privacy ruptured.

German Ambassador Harald Braun told the debate that: "Where mass surveillance technology is used, a situation can easily be created where no privacy of communications on the Internet exists at all," adding that there's a risk we could turn into "Orwellian states" if privacy continues to be eroded at current pace.

The resolution isn't at the being-a-law stage, but a vote in December will, if passed, see all governments asked to introduce legislation that protects digital privacy. The UK and US don't appear among the list of sponsor states, and have apparently been fighting to limit the scope of the ruling. [AFP via Gigaom]

Lulz. It is stuff like this that makes this world so delicious. Clearly Russia is a bit of a dick, slightly evil and possibly Putin is the next Hitler.

But its refreshing to see that the UK and USA are still consistently marginal s who basically wish they could be as cool as Russia.

Both resolutions stemmed from German and Brazilian anger at the actions of the NSA and its partners, including the British spy agency GCHQ, as revealed by whistleblower Edward Snowden. The new version also follows two reports by high-level UN officials, that said indiscriminate communications or metadata retention was incompatible with human rights.

It appears from the names at the top of the new resolution that it is not backed by any of the “Five Eyes” spy club – the U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia and New Zealand, nor is it backed by China. It is, interestingly, backed by Russia.

The full list of sponsors includes: Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Ireland, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Norway, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, and Uruguay.

[Basil II the B.S]

Well, well, well, well, well, look at who stands for freedom and who does not.
And shame on the Anglo-Saxons.

[DaVinci]

... “Five Eyes” spy club – the U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia and New Zealand ...

No wonder, these ones are the regions of Orwell's "Oceania", under the surveillance of the beloved Big Brother (1984), but nowadays, he watches at much more people's well-being, just also in many regions of Orwell's "Eurasia"

[Vanoi]

I'm laughing hard right now because many of those "supporters" of the UN anti-spying bill actively spy on their citizens through the internet. Russia, France, and Germany being obvious culprits.

[Sire Brenshar]

I remember when news of the United States spying on Germany emerged the media in Poland was complaining why they went getting spied on by the Americans.

Honestly though that bill must be tailored to specifically address the ''five eyes'' (as they're apparently called) using the information from the Snowden leaks, not least because those are among the countries most likely to actually adhere to the resolution. By which I of course mean they still wont.

[Phier]

Strongly worded letter, flex that muscle.

[Caligula's_Horse]

Strongly worded letter, flex that muscle.

My thoughts exactly.

With the exception of security council resolutions backed by a volunteered national army (which being security council resolutions, are already unopposed by the five permanent members), the UN might as well be a yapping purse mutt.
People seem to think the UN has much more power then it really does for some reason.

[justicar5]

Strongly worded letter, flex that muscle.

So since you have nothing to hide and nothing to fear when are you getting that always on web cam surgically implanted in your forehead? That should be the requirement for supporting the level of surveillance the US is engaged in, an always on, always broadcasting to a public webiste camera surveying every single thing you do, your kids do grandkids do, great grandkids do etc, for the rest of the life span of your bloodline, as soon as the kids skulls can support, they get the implant, You seem to believe that no one should have any privacy, so you can be the exemplar.

[Shambloc]

So since you have nothing to hide and nothing to fear when are you getting that always on web cam surgically implanted in your forehead? That should be the requirement for supporting the level of surveillance the US is engaged in, an always on, always broadcasting to a public webiste camera surveying every single thing you do, your kids do grandkids do, great grandkids do etc, for the rest of the life span of your bloodline, as soon as the kids skulls can support, they get the implant, You seem to believe that no one should have any privacy, so you can be the exemplar.

Strawman much?

[justicar5]

Strawman much?

no, entirely accurate, if people use nothing to hide, nothing to fear, then they will have exactly that mush privacy: none. If you want the total global intrusion of the NSA, then you can be totally globally intruded upon. After all, if it reasonable to accept the intrusion of the NSA into every single interaction of every human being on earth, then it is reasonable for every single human being on earth to intrude into your interactions.

[Phier]

So since you have nothing to hide and nothing to fear when are you getting that always on web cam surgically implanted in your forehead? That should be the requirement for supporting the level of surveillance the US is engaged in, an always on, always broadcasting to a public webiste camera surveying every single thing you do, your kids do grandkids do, great grandkids do etc, for the rest of the life span of your bloodline, as soon as the kids skulls can support, they get the implant, You seem to believe that no one should have any privacy, so you can be the exemplar.

Begun already it has.

[justicar5]

Begun already it has.

t

hat system melded with your skull with a device to kill you if it is ever switched off. About right given the surveillance/terror strike combo the US is going for

[Gaidin]

Lulz. It is stuff like this that makes this world so delicious. Clearly Russia is a bit of a dick, slightly evil and possibly Putin is the next Hitler.

But its refreshing to see that the UK and USA are still consistently marginal s who basically wish they could be as cool as Russia.

Hey, guy who quoted an article with the German ambassador talking about privacy in it. You realize they have a spy agency that by their very nature would break a treaty like this too right? I mean, assuming it ever gets to the level of anything legally binding. Germany would break it just as fast as any other country. Find someone yammering who at least wouldn't or can't break it.

[Denny Crane!]

Hey, guy who quoted an article with the German ambassador talking about privacy in it. You realize they have a spy agency that by their very nature would break a treaty like this too right? I mean, assuming it ever gets to the level of anything legally binding. Germany would break it just as fast as any other country. Find someone yammering who at least wouldn't or can't break it.

And this puts sanctions on the people who do break it. And that is also wild speculation on your part. At least they are willing to stand up and say yeah, lets sign a bill and attempt to do something about it.

Any country could break it. The point being is this signals a willingness to abide by a law and the ability to sanction the people who do break it. What ridiculous world do you live in where you could create a law that no one could ever break...seriously? When we put a law on murder does that stop murders ever happening because people no longer have the ability?

The really aggressive sarcastic tone works better when the posts actually have a relevant point.

[Vanoi]

Any country could break it. The point being is this signals a willingness to abide by a law and the ability to sanction the people who do break it. What ridiculous world do you live in where you could create a law that no one could ever break...seriously? When we put a law on murder does that stop murders ever happening because people no longer have the ability?

The really aggressive sarcastic tone works better when the posts actually have a relevant point.

Signing a treaty does not mean you're are willing to abide by the law. The countries who sign this treaty will act no differently than they do now. Look at Russia who spys on its citizens as much of the US does. Do you think they are going to stop doing that by signing this treaty?

Is France going to stop this?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...-operation-nsa

What about Germany?

http://rt.com/op-edge/german-governm...rivacy-us-780/

[Gaidin]

What ridiculous world do you live in where you could create a law that no one could ever break...seriously? When we put a law on murder does that stop murders ever happening because people no longer have the ability?

The really aggressive sarcastic tone works better when the posts actually have a relevant point.

That's what spy agencies do. They break laws. Seriously. Get with the times. The only sacrosanct treaty(and thus law) really is that defining the embassy, consul, and thus foreign territory on that country's territory. What seriously makes you think this would be any different?

[Denny Crane!]

That's what spy agencies do. They break laws. Seriously. Get with the times. The only sacrosanct treaty(and thus law) really is that defining the embassy, consul, and thus foreign territory on that country's territory. What seriously makes you think this would be any different?

Perhaps a treaty that makes it that way in the other reply you say it is treaties between countries that make the difference, well there you go!

[Dr Zoidberg]

That's what spy agencies do. They break laws. Seriously.

To be more accurate, they break other countries' laws.

Usually (although there are exceptions), spy agencies' activities are all perfectly legal as far as their own countries go, as there is usually legislation in place to allow them to do precisely what they do. In Australia's example, the powers of its agencies are governed by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) Act of 1979 and the Intelligence Services Act of 2001.

[mrmouth]

If anyone needs a reminder as to what we are dealing with, former CIA director Leon Panetta's book is a good place to start.

I really dont know why the US and the other countries who are engaged in collection of massive amounts of electronic information don't simply fight back with the myriad examples where this practice has saved lives. Some of the biggest successes are nearing a decade old and were plots that involved some very serious components, like dirty bombs. If people can write openly about these plots then the US can publicly state their case and explain that a lot of people are alive today and one of their and at least one major city was not exposed to radioactive isotopes because the US was able to monitor places that have historically been havens for terrorists plotting against the West.

That isn't hyperbole, by the way.

[Dr Zoidberg]

I really dont know why the US and the other countries who are engaged in collection of massive amounts of electronic information don't simply fight back with the myriad examples where this practice has saved lives.

It's because many of the techniques used in these operations are often still used today and so remain classified. To reveal what was achieved would be to reveal capabilities and inform your opponents (be they state or non-state actors) of what you can and can't do.