[Closed] Terrorism

The other 'hotspot' that badly needs covering and segregation applying is our own jails, no amount of illegal bad stuff occurring in the name of the prophet there I imagine.

outofbreath - Member

Let's say they didn't but in future they thoroughly investigate every report. They find he's a self confessed Islamist. They find a kitchen cupboard with knives. They find he has a car.

He's commited no offence.

There were 3 of them, so you're not looking for a knife or a car, you're looking for planning and interaction. The attack wasn't the first offence.

I am amazed how many people have an issue with state snooping. Surely, if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear.

Do you want to give me your address? Might as well post it here, you've nothing to hide. Then I'll pop round and install a public webcam in your bedroom. What are you afraid of?

chestercopperpot - Member

Further high level military action is inevitable now public support has been firmed up.

erm have we learned nothing from the past 30 odd years of bombing the shit out of the middle east?

You know, I am hearing the shouts of "something must be done", "enough is enough".

I agree.

However, from the Maybot, to those ex-SAS blokes, Tommy Robinson, Farage and all the rest, no-one has actually come up with anything legal, practical or useful.

I am not a security expert. It's not my job to work out what "something" is.

Who's job is it and what's something?

There were 3 of them, so you're not looking for a knife or a car, you're looking for planning and interaction. The attack wasn't the first offence.

Short of having a microphone in the room recording them discussing and planning the attack, how do you propose identifying and prosecuting such an alleged offence?

All I'm hearing here so far is that somehow 'investigating' people more would have been some sort of panacea that would have prevented them doing an attack - despite the fact that they had already been identified and investigated.

Sooner or later you either need to accept that either we accept that these attacks cannot be prevented, or we start locking people up on the basis of suspicion and risk despite them having not *yet* actually done anything provably illegal under current law.

Does the risk to society outweigh the personal freedoms?

Short of having a microphone in the room recording them discussing and planning the attack,

well following up from a tip off to the terrorisnm hotline and further investigation that sounds like a plan in itself

doesnt involve more armed coppers tho, sorry

gobuchul - Member
You know, I am hearing the shouts of "something must be done", "enough is enough".

I agree.

However, from the Maybot, to those ex-SAS blokes, Tommy Robinson, Farage and all the rest, no-one has actually come up with anything legal, practical or useful.

I am not a security expert. It's not my job to work out what "something" is.

Who's job is it and what's something?

The lefties liberals might complain but they too cannot do much at all, they are very good at complaining though.

Basically whatever ways the government come up with there will be people complaining.

However, at least the police are armed now which is good. Less talk. 🙂

well following up from a tip off to the terrorisnm hotline and further investigation that sounds like a plan in itself

that requires having the police to do the further investigation. Apparently, that’s not on the cards :-/

Rachel

Another aspect is giving all that capability to the state also hopes they remain competent in protecting (they also including the almost inevitable private sector contractors).
The recent wannacry problems show the flaws in this.

Indeed. We lost half of the NHS for a week thanks to hacking tools created by the NSA getting out into the wide world (and that's actually the public Internet, not some corner of the Dark Web). This has been quietly brushed under the carpet, meanwhile Theresa May wants to ban irreversable encryption which even by the government's own high standards is absolutely barking.

Practicalities aside (online banking, anyone?), the technology and the knowledge is in the public domain I could knock up a script to generate RSA keys in a few minutes and I'm not a programmer. You may as well try to ban French. (Or more accurately I suppose, maths.)

Tell me more about this banning of French - you have me interested...

that requires having the police to do the further investigation. Apparently, that’s not on the cards :-/

We've got more people on watch lists than we have watchers, and the police has had 20,000 job cuts. To all those who want "something to be done," it's really not very hard at all to see where the root cause of problem lies. If you reduce security resources then you are less secure, QED.

We've got more people on watch lists than we have watchers

And again - how does 'watching' them stop an attack?

Unless and until you are willing to lock them up *before* they break the law, then that's all you are doing, watching.

allthegear - Member
that requires having the police to do the further investigation. Apparently, that’s not on the cards :-/

Rachel

It's only practical when they are at last minute planning otherwise it's impractical.

Also only if you are watching the right people ...

Do you want to give me your address? Might as well post it here, you've nothing to hide. Then I'll pop round and install a public webcam in your bedroom. What are you afraid of?

However, in answer to your question. I would have no issue with the authorities trawling through any aspect of my life as I have nothing to hide 🙂

ninfan - Member

Does the risk to society outweigh the personal freedoms?

And again - how does 'watching' them stop an attack?

Also - the home office haven't released information about how these other terror attacks have been thwarted, so it's very difficult to assess whether that could be enhansed through increased manpower/observation/etc.

And again - how does 'watching' them stop an attack?

I don't know exactly, as I don't work for MI5 / SIS / the police. But for every terrorist plot that succeeds ten are foiled, so they're demonstrably doing something right.

I would have no issue with the authorities trawling through any aspect of my life as I have nothing to hide

Remember the Investigatory Powers Bill (the so-called Snooper's Charter), where "the authorities" can access your personal data from ISPs? Here's a list of those authorities:

[i]Metropolitan police force
City of London police force
Police forces maintained under section 2 of the Police Act 1996
Police Service of Scotland
Police Service of Northern Ireland
British Transport Police
Ministry of Defence Police
Royal Navy Police
Royal Military Police
Royal Air Force Police
Security Service
Secret Intelligence Service
GCHQ
Ministry of Defence
Department of Health
Home Office
Ministry of Justice
National Crime Agency
HM Revenue & Customs
Department for Transport
Department for Work and Pensions
NHS trusts and foundation trusts in England that provide ambulance services
Common Services Agency for the Scottish Health Service
Competition and Markets Authority
Criminal Cases Review Commission
Department for Communities in Northern Ireland
Department for the Economy in Northern Ireland
Department of Justice in Northern Ireland
Financial Conduct Authority
Fire and rescue authorities under the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004
Food Standards Agency
Food Standards Scotland
Gambling Commission
Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority
Health and Safety Executive
Independent Police Complaints Commissioner
Information Commissioner
NHS Business Services Authority
Northern Ireland Ambulance Service Health and Social Care Trust
Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service Board
Northern Ireland Health and Social Care Regional Business Services Organisation
Office of Communications
Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland
Police Investigations and Review Commissioner
Scottish Ambulance Service Board
Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission
Serious Fraud Office
Welsh Ambulance Services National Health Service Trust[/i]

When's it convenient for me to pop round with that webcam? Are you free on Wednesday?

we start locking people up on the basis of suspicion and risk despite them having not *yet* actually done anything provably illegal under current law.

When are you going to realise internment doesn't fing work?!

Regarding the question of whether watching them is enough or not, probably not, so under current circumstance... well tbh you just have to accept that these things will have every now and again. Whether people like it or not, there is some form of link to the shit happening in the middle east.. It's of no co-incidence that the worse the ME gets, the more of these types of attacks there are.

There's also an awful lot of talk about radicalisation, and i don't know how you'd go about it, internment certainly isn't the answer. But perhaps there should be a bit more than just watching people, some sort of engagement and de-radicalisation programme.

That concept is wide open for discussion as i don't have the answers. I know it'll never get anywhere while it's framed in the context of good and evil however. The first step to solving a problem is understanding the problem. Biggest thing I can see is that no-one really understands. The conversation is too one sided. Lets start hearing the excuses and counter them publicly.

erm have we learned nothing from the past 30 odd years of bombing the shit out of the middle east?

@ Kimbers - Nope not as long as our economies run on oil, which they still for the most part do.

Cougar - Moderator
When's it convenient for me to pop round with that webcam? Are you free on Wednesday?

edit: Oh ya ... why webcam? 😆

Those are government bodies or related institutions

Some of which have been hacked recently, yes?

RichPenny - Member

Those are government bodies or related institutions

Some of which have been hacked recently, yes?

All this ridiculous talk of internment, you'd think the conspiracy laws don't exist. Trouble is doing people for conspiracy takes up a huge amount of resources to collect the evidence. Funny that they can fund undercover police and surveillance for environmental activists but not not terror suspects who've been on the telly on a programme called 'The jihadis next door'.

edit: Oh ya ... why webcam?

Because he's got nothing to hide, so why not?

That concept is wide open for discussion as i don't have the answers.

For all our conjecture, I expect no-one does. Otherwise, y'know, we'd have done it by now.

Cougar - Moderator

edit: Oh ya ... why webcam?

Because he's got nothing to hide, so why not?

Anything I like, apparently.

Cougar - Moderator
Anything I like, apparently.

Terror in Britain - What did the Prime Minister Know.

John Pilger tells it straight.

http://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdom/terror-britain-prime-minister-know/

I would have no issue with the authorities trawling through any aspect of my life as I have nothing to hide

I pity you 😉

I find the views of Maajid Nawaz and his radio show on LBC good listening, and he has more experience of the issues here than probably anyone.

This was a quite shocking call a few weeks ago and highlights the extent of extremism in this country :

[url= http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/maajid-nawaz/maajid-talks-to-man-who-wanted-to-assassinate-him/ ]Maajid Talks To Man Who Wanted To Assassinate Him[/url]

the whole interview is in the second video, not the first snippet.

[url= http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/maajid-nawaz/stop-saying-violence-has-nothing-to-do-with-islam/ ]Maajid Nawaz: Stop Saying Violence Has Nothing To Do With Islam[/url]

[url= http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/maajid-nawaz/maajid-nawaz-refuses-to-praise-didsbury-mosque/ ]Why Maajid Nawaz Refuses To Praise Didsbury Mosque For Speaking Out Against Isis[/url]

[url= http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/maajid-nawaz/four-point-plan-to-defeat-islamist-terrorists/ ]Maajid Nawaz's Four-Point Plan To Defeat Islamist Terrorists[/url]

[url= http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/clive-bull/tim-marshall-saudi-arabia-exported-islam-terrorism/ ]And something of interest about Saudi on Clive Bulls show[/url]

When's it convenient for me to pop round with that webcam? Are you free on Wednesday?

Maybe that explains your reluctance to state snooping?

ninfan - Member

Short of having a microphone in the room recording them discussing and planning the attack, how do you propose identifying and prosecuting such an alleged offence?

You seem to know a lot about this case. Where was this room? When did the one conversation they had happen? Get onto the CPS, they'll want to hear from you.

While you're talking to them, ask them about all of the succesful investigations and prosecutions they've completed that you don't think are possible.

Someone a few pages back made a reference to "Minority Report" with regards to predicting crimes before they happen and it got me thinking about a story I had read regarding Facebook.
[url= https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/01/facebook-advertising-data-insecure-teens ]I think this is the article.[/url]

According to the article Facebook had revealed to advertisers that "it" can determine in real time a persons mood and determine whether young people were stressed, vulnerable etc so as to better target say, cosmetics to young girls.

In a similar article (on ****) Facebook was inadvertently outing gay users, or at least shown to be capable of determining a person's sexuality when they themselves hadn't decided to make it public. It makes me wonder if at some point in the near future algorithms on Twitter, Facebook and various other platforms could be able to determine whether someone with Islamist tendencies might be contemplating or getting ready to initiate an attack.

Ya, but you are not the only one that gets the hassle if you happen to be on their database coz everyone on their database gets it.

Does not help chewkw explain to his wife why he has a login to goatporn.com, just because a dozy civil servant left a laptop on the train.

Seeing Minority Report mentioned reminded me of this article that mentioned that Tobago wanted use an analytics platform analysing online data and phonecalls to identify pre-crime
[url= https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/07/the-great-british-brexit-robbery-hijacked-democracy ]https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/07/the-great-british-brexit-robbery-hijacked-democracy[/url]

greentricky

Seeing Minority Report mentioned reminded me of this article that mentioned that Tobago wanted use an analytics platform analysing online data and phonecalls to identify pre-crime

It's only a matter of time. However, such technologies will probably just follow the money, so they'll be used to sell you soft drinks or make you gamble as opposed to stop crime.

Oops, wrong thread!

There were 3 of them, so you're not looking for a knife or a car, you're looking for planning and interaction. The attack wasn't the first offence.

As I said above, if they're doing planning on paper or in a traceable way online then that's already an offence, there's no need for any change. (Conspiracy to...)

...but then you have to (currently) get a warrant and confiscate their PCs/Phones etc for weeks on end for forensic examination. Would two for three people saying "He's a bit radical." be enough to get that? IANAL but I doubt it. (In fact I hope not.)

So do we want the policy that if there's an accusation that a Muslim is an extremist then they get their electronics confiscated for a while without warrant. Would you apply the same to non-muslims? If you only applied it to muslims you'd alienate them further, if you applied it to everyone you'd really piss everyone off.

I think we've already got it about right in the UK. I take on a miniscule chance of getting mained in a a terrorist atrocity and in exchange the police can't lock me up on a whim or confiscate my PC and phone for months.

As it happens I expect all that's academic 'cos these home grown nutters have probably learned not to leave a load of evidence of planning lying around. In this case the fake bomb packs would be clear evidence of conspiracy, but when did they start doing that?

outofbreath - Member

So do we want the policy that if there's an accusation that a Muslim is an extremist then they get their electronics confiscated for a while without warrant.

Woah, you jumped to "without a warrant" for some reason there.

Essentially what I want is the current powers or something very like that, used to their full extent, by skilled professionals with plentiful resourcing, with reasonable checks and balances. It's way too early to be talking about that with the latest attacks- there's just nothing like enough information out there. But you can say with certainty that across the entire system, leads and opportunities are missed. That'll always be the case, nothing is perfect but there seems little doubt we're further from perfect than we could be.

Starting to get worried now. Do you have a fetish for watching middle aged men strutting around in their underpants
Maybe that explains your reluctance to state snooping?

Not particularly but that's not the point. Would you be happy with the Internet watching you strut round in your underpants? You've nothing to hide after all.

A desire for privacy doesn't necessarily imply illegal activity. Do away with screens in hospitals, you've nothing to hide. Get rid of doors on toilet cubicles, you've nothing to hide. Stick a webcam up in the shower, you've nothing to hide. Publish a transcript of your session with your psychotherapist on Facebook, you've nothing to hide.

[i]Everyone[/i] has something to hide, if you disagree I'll be round on Wednesday. Still waiting for you to post your address on the forum though. Why haven't you done that yet? Have you got something to hide?

Aside,

Interesting news report that doesn't seem to have been, er, reported anywhere:

https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/207047-Religious-scholars-issue-unanimous-fatwa-declaring-suicide-attacks-Haram

Woah, you jumped to "without a warrant" for some reason there.

You snipped the stated reason. You said the police should have been looking for evidence of the existing offence of "conspiracy to". I said I assumed a warrant would not be forthcoming on the basis of three or four people saying 'Ohhh, he seems quite radical'. Hence without warrant, because a warrant requires a genuine reason to be suspicious.

Essentially what I want is the current powers or something very like that

...weird because I could have sworn you were arguing that the police should have been fishing around for evidence of a conspiracy offence in response to all calls about radicalized individuals rather than waiting for "reasonable grounds to suspect that an indictable offence has been committed" which is the current requirement.

It's way too early to be talking about that with the latest attacks- there's just nothing like enough information out there.

I think even at this stage we can be pretty sure nobody phoned the police with specific evidence of a conspiracy to cause a terrorist outrage. A policeman fought three of them with his baton and got slashed to bits. Given that attitude to protecting the public I very much doubt the police ignored any kind of specific actionable information.

We all know the protocol by now -
1. This has nothing to do with Islam.
2. The guy was a mentally ill 'lone wolf'.
3. Those who object to points 1 and 2 are racist bigots.
4. Blame everything on UK foreign policy.
5. Change Facebook profile to flag of inflicted country.
6. Light some candles, hold a vigil and go on a peace march.
7. Tell the world we will fight them with love.
8. Wait for the next slaughter to happen.
9. Repeat.

Did May just call for longer custodial sentences for terrorists on the news now? 😯

outofbreath - Member

...weird because I could have sworn you were arguing that the police should have been fishing around for evidence of a conspiracy offence in response to all calls about radicalized individuals rather than waiting for "reasonable grounds to suspect that an indictable offence has been committed" which is the current requirement

...for a search warrant to raid a home or premises. It's [i]not[/i] the grounds required to start an investigation, nor does an investigation start with a search warrant.

Honestly, I think you know this but you want to make it all about search warrants as a proxy for all investigation. Maybe because it's the only way you can make it about whether anyone "phoned the police with specific evidence of a conspiracy to cause a terrorist outrage."?

They don't rely on phone calls providing all the information they need to get a warrant and make an immediate arrest- they rely on those to start and feed investigations and build a case. "Fishing around", as you put it. Suspicion goes in the front and evidence comes out the back as I was told

mitsumonkey - Member

We all know the protocol by now

What a load of [i]pish[/i]. I mean, how ignorant do you have to be, to think that people are saying these [i]three[/i] attackers were lone wolves?

mitsumonkey - Member
We all know the protocol by now -
1. This has nothing to do with Islam.
2. The guy was a mentally ill 'lone wolf'.
3. Those who object to points 1 and 2 are racist bigots.
4. Blame everything on UK foreign policy.
5. Change Facebook profile to flag of inflicted country.
6. Light some candles, hold a vigil and go on a peace march.
7. Tell the world we will fight them with love.
8. Wait for the next slaughter to happen.
9. Repeat.

10. further yer own secular agenda.

mitsumonkey - Member

We all know the protocol by now -
1. This has nothing to do with Islam.
2. The guy was a mentally ill 'lone wolf'.
3. Those who object to points 1 and 2 are racist bigots.
4. Blame everything on UK foreign policy.
5. Change Facebook profile to flag of inflicted country.
6. Light some candles, hold a vigil and go on a peace march.
7. Tell the world we will fight them with love.
8. Wait for the next slaughter to happen.
9. Repeat.

Rather accurate description that. 🙂

I have a list but this lot will be up in arms if I post it ... 😆

Edit:

seosamh77 - Member
10. further yer own secular agenda.

i think mitsumonkey nicely conforming to the britain first stereotype there ( do i violate rule 3) and managed not to read a single post here, really a very impressive display of ignorance!

I have a list but this lot will be up in arms if I post it ...

let me guess zombie-maggots 😉

Did May just call for longer custodial sentences for terrorists on the news now?

Where exactly? The prison system is up the creek (in case no-ones realised.) Our prisons are slightly full, with less than minimum staffing levels.

Interesting news report that doesn't seem to have been, er, reported anywhere:

Whilst the content of cougars link is to be applauded, it doesn't really amount to much 🙁 Islam doesn't have a recognised hierarchy such as a Pope or archbishops. The worthy scholars who issued the fatwa speak only for themselves. Others views exist and arguments could be made to invoke fatwas on the fatwa issuers.

I think you know this

Yeah, I've got a pretty good idea. I've been asking all day what the people calling for more action on these reports want to happen in cases where no crime is committed: Self confessed Extremist. He has access to a car. He has knives in his kitchen. None of that is illegal. You can't get evidence of a conspiracy without a warrant which a magistrate won't be giving on the basis of hearsay, and anyway, they're sure to be aware of the importance of not leaving evidence of conspiracy lying around either online or in practical form.

When I ask what you specifically want to do you all resort to euphemisms like 'intervention' & 'building a case'.

Pretty clear you're all actually talking about either internment or harrassing Muslims in general on flimsy evidence, which is utterly counter productive and would create more disaffected people.

"Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."

kimbers - Member

I have a list but this lot will be up in arms if I post it ...

let me guess zombie-maggots

Now to rehabilitate the rest. 😛

We all know the protocol by now -
1. This has nothing to do with Islam.
2. The guy was a mentally ill 'lone wolf'.
3. Those who object to points 1 and 2 are racist bigots.
4. Blame everything on UK foreign policy.
5. Change Facebook profile to flag of inflicted country.
6. Light some candles, hold a vigil and go on a peace march.
7. Tell the world we will fight them with love.
8. Wait for the next slaughter to happen.
9. Repeat.

I see you started a thread on the Dortmund bus attack, linking it to Islamic terrorism. Which was indeed nothing to do with Islam and carried out by a lone wolf. Not sure if you're a racist bigot, don't know you. I think your ideas that we can conquer terrorism by removing freedoms are a bit dangerous though.

outofbreath - Member

Pretty clear you're all actually talking about either internment or harrassing Muslims in general on flimsy evidence, which is utterly counter productive and would create more disaffected people.

Would you do me a favour and stop making shit up? It's rude.

Oh, and "building a case" isn't a euphemism, it's just what it's called. You know- police work. Which does not only involve, or always require, getting warrants for things no matter how many times you say it.

Whilst the content of cougars link is to be applauded, it doesn't really amount to much Islam doesn't have a recognised hierarchy such as a Pope or archbishops.

You're absolutely right; my context was really in terms of "why isn't the 'Muslim community' speaking out / doing anything?"

We all know the protocol by now -

What's your point, caller? What would you suggest we do instead?

What's your point, caller? What would you suggest we do instead?

mikewsmith - Member
Usual stuff really isn't it. Bit racist doesn't like being called it. I've noticed an increase in facebook keyboard racist posts in the last week, lots of just shoot em stuff.Send in this or that etc. followed by claims of "I'd do it" it won't be long before the poor bloke in the ever repeated example of a bit foreign looking leaving a shop with a block of knives for the kitchen is set upon in the street.

Crikey you have some strong imagination there but don't you have faith in the British people? 😯

but don't you have faith in the British people?

It's evidence not imagination.

mikewsmith - Member

but don't you have faith in the British people?

Hate crime up since Brexit
Right Wing Tabloids pedalling Crap
Attacks on foreigners up since Brexit

It's evidence not imagination.

Are you sure they are hate crimes?

Right wing tabloids where? Which newspaper are you referring to?

I don't know about others but I sure look every bit a foreigner I can assure you that. I even speak with a very strong foreign accent. 😮

Which foreigners are attacked?

I think we've already got it about right in the UK. I take on a miniscule chance of getting mained in a a terrorist atrocity and in exchange the police can't lock me up on a whim or confiscate my PC and phone for months.

Agree. This is the sense of perspective is missing and how the terrorists are actually 'winning' even though the cliche's continue to come out about how we won't let it change us.

The fundamental problem is it is difficult to fight against a cause, especially one where its followers believe death is something beneficial to them and expect to die. Fear tactics are not going to work.

We can continue to react against them, but the answer lies in finding out why these people feel they have a cause to attack us and addressing that.

Some simple questions. When did Muslim extremist attacks start in the UK? Why are they pissed off with us?

It can't just be because of what the Koran says - we have had devout Muslims in the UK for centuries and they have lived peacefully among us, so why now? Were there any attacks when the UK was pursuing its wars against the Mahdi in Egypt in the 1880 and 1890s?

Another terrible attack. Personally I have nothing much to add I haven't said so many tikes before on here. Theresa May was spot on when she said we have been far too tolerant of extremist views, things must change.

Specifically on internet the companies like facebook and youtube must be regukated as media companies and held responsible for content. Not one of us has a legitimate need for end to end encrypted uncrackable text / email messages. Access to such technology should be restricted to licensed users/organisations.

We must change our approach and accept new "restrictions" to our way of life until this threat is defeated

Finally these where potential suicide bombers, eradicating that threat is the priority over any attempt to arrest them

Not one of us has a legitimate need for end to end encrypted uncrackable text / email messages. Access to such technology should be restricted to licensed users/organisations.

We must change our approach and accept new "restrictions" to our way of life until this threat is defeated

Access to such technology should be restricted to licensed users/organisations.

Also. Me and my mate both have a singletrack magazine. How are you going to stop that being used for encryption?

@epic there has always been a subset of Muslims seeking to do us harm and establish themselves and their religion as dominant. The religion itself was founded and expanded via conquest - go back to Medinah now in Saudi and originally a Jewish city.

Brutual Middle East regimes kept the extremism largely in check - fighting fire with fire in the true Biblical sense

@dissonance

Lets start with what is not licenced, Telegram, WhatsAp, Facebook, email services. Banks can send approved encrypted messages, police, government. It would be a short list

I'm 54 and have lived my life happily with end to end encryption for the vast majority of it

We have had this argumebt on here before. I was calling fir an wnd to uncrackable encryption 2+ years ago. The companies use it to make money and to cover their arses as "we cannot read any messages so cannot be held responsible for the content"

Also. Me and my mate both have a singletrack magazine. How are you going to stop that being used for encryption?

I'm 54 and have lived my life happily with end to end encryption for the vast majority of it

On top of this who is allowed to view your communications? Given the levels of corporate espionage said to be coming from places like China can I keep any of my discussions private?

Not one of us has a legitimate need for end to end encrypted uncrackable text / email messages. Access to such technology should be restricted to licensed users/organisations.

Even by your standards, that's weapons-grade mince.

Usual stuff really isn't it. Bit racist doesn't like being called it.

Precisely this. I think it was a "not racist" racist talking about ducks walking and quacking a day or so ago. Same applies here. If you're coming up with 'solutions' that involve the indiscriminate targeting of one community or religion, then you're part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Once the terrorists have been killed, as was their original intention, what does it take for them to make the transition into 'paradise' and to get those virgins ?

Do they have to be buried properly according to their faith, or do they just get straight in?

If they do need a proper burial then just refuse them that, maybe cremate them and feed their ashes to some pigs or something similairly insulting.

That would stop so many wanting to die in their religious war, thinking it is a get-out from their current sad lives.

Lets start with what is not licenced, Telegram, WhatsAp, Facebook, email services. Banks can send approved encrypted messages, police, government. It would be a short list

What about dropbox and cloud storage, confidential business communications, VPN for remote work? It would be a very long and a very pointless list.

@Turnerguy

[url= https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/05/imams-refuse-funeral-prayers-to-indefensible-london-bridge-attackers ]https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/05/imams-refuse-funeral-prayers-to-indefensible-london-bridge-attackers[/url]

@Turnerguy

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/05/imams-refuse-funeral-prayers-to-indefensible-london-bridge-attackers

yes, but doesn't mean that someone is not going to bury them.

^

More than 130 religious leaders use unusual sanction to express disgust at murders ‘contravening Islam’ and vow to root out extremism

Yet not a word about this in The Telegraph, The Sun, The Mail, et al?

The Telegraph, to be fair, did report the mosque refusing to bury the Manchester bomber.

As ever, our press is a confection of lumpen appeals and/or counter-appeals to common prejudices and/or cartoon stereotypes. Rarely objective and usually exploitative via most the divisive spin and selective reporting.

Many of us believe simply what we wish to believe, and as such we seek headlines and narratives that appear to confirm our beliefs, fears and wishes.

Does anyone here have the courage and candour to recognise this in themselves? If so do you see the game you are in? And now willingly?

I'm 54 and have lived my life happily with end to end encryption for the vast majority of it

But you have always considered postal mail to be a secure and private medium, I presume? You know that thing you were always taught about not opening other people's mail? How would you feel if your letters started appearing having been opened and taped back shut again, with no explanation?

What about if you noticed that the door on your local postbox was being left unlocked? Or your neighbour was going through your post?

Banks can send approved encrypted messages, police, government. It would be a short list

Have you looked at the DPA recently and the guidelines around protecting sensitive data? Lots of companies hold personal data that they are required to keep secure.

I was calling fir an wnd to uncrackable encryption 2+ years ago.

The companies use it to make money and to cover their arses as "we cannot read any messages so cannot be held responsible for the content"

Malvern Rider, it was covered by the Mail as well as the Metro, plus other networks like Foxnews and CNN. Daily Mail link below:

http://www.****/news/article-4574636/Muslim-priests-refuse-perform-prayer-attackers.html