
British Prime Minister Suggests Banning Some Online Messaging Apps - t0dd
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/01/12/british-prime-minister-suggests-banning-some-online-messaging-apps
======
sd8f9iu
Honestly, why do people think that a terrorist attack like this requires any
dramatic changes to society? The fact is that some guys got guns and shot up a
building, in the name of a currently popular, violent ideology. When will we
ever be able to completely eradicate this? The number of people killed per
year in the Western world due to terrorist attacks is incredibly low. Perhaps
we don't need a routing of our security apparatus and freedoms to prevent
what, without the inclusion of radical Islam, would be seen as an violent
crime.

We got two wars in the wake of 9/11, and I don't think there was any actual
increased terrorist threat.

~~~
Cyther606
Because shocking attacks get the public's attention. With all eyes on the TV
screen, it's the perfect time to introduce public policy changes that strip
people of their rights.

All the better if I can defend my statements by inciting a sense of
nationalism or publicly shared responsibility for preventing future heinous
crimes.

This is the raw video of the shooting of the French policeman:
[http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bc6_1420632668](http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bc6_1420632668)

Here it is in slow motion, zoomed in:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_c4IUO6h7w](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_c4IUO6h7w)

We are told this is footage of a 7.62mm round fired into a target at point
blank range.

With no recoil exhibited by the rifle, no blood present anywhere on the scene,
and no violent head or body movement on part of the person "shot" at point
blank range, it's very possible that blanks were fired and that this is yet
another deep event meant to mislead the public into accepting a hidden agenda.

~~~
rosser
Are you for reals calling false-flag on the Charlie Hebdo attack?

~~~
Cyther606
Quoting Dr. Paul Craig Roberts:

> Among these purposes is bringing France back into Washington’s orbit. The
> French president had recently said that the sanctions against Russia should
> be terminated.

> Hollande was allying himself with French economic interests instead of with
> Washington’s hegemonic foreign policy.

> Another purpose is to stifle the growing European sympathy for the
> Palestinians and to realign Europe with Israel.

> Another purpose is to counter the rising opposition in Europe to more Middle
> Eastern wars. The American neoconservatives have not completed their agenda.
> Syria, Iran, Hezbollah, and Saudi Arabia are still standing.

> And there can be other purposes not apparent to me.

> My recommendation is that you not believe the print and TV media, but think.
> The failure of Americans to think is why they are 13 years into war and live
> in a police state.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic
Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for
Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had
many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide
following. Roberts' latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism
and Economic Dissolution of the West and How America Was Lost.

[http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/01/11/suspicions-
growin...](http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/01/11/suspicions-growing-
french-shootings-false-flag-operation/)

~~~
untog
Let's be honest with ourselves - there is not one shred of evidence in there.
Yes, for the reasons you state, America _could_ have staged a false flag
attack. But that's just a list assembled after the fact to suit the narrative
the author has already created.

 _" And there can be other purposes not apparent to me."_

Oh, well, why didn't you say? Wrap this one up as a one and done case, then!

It goes without saying that he is also a 9/11 Truther:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Craig_Roberts#September_11...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Craig_Roberts#September_11.2C_2001_attacks)

~~~
Cyther606
Paul was presenting the information in a politically correct format. The US
would never carry out such a cowardly act of state sponsored terror.

------
bjackman
I'm surprised to find that this story has hit me pretty hard emotionally. The
stuff Cameron and Theresa May are saying these days is really quite extreme. I
feel totally abandoned by politics and genuinely, deeply frightened about the
direction our legislature is headed. Is this a part of growing up? The
mainstream is so far away from my own views that I don't have any voice. I'm
really starting to see why a lot of libertarians in the US are so hyperbolic
and full of panic.

~~~
computerjunkie
_Is this a part of growing up?_

A bit off topic: Ive asked myself this question in general for the past couple
of months. People dying from wars and incidents that happened a couple of days
ago makes me anxious, miserable, lost and helpless.Maybe its media amplifying
everything, I don't know but its truly unpleasant.

~~~
t0dd
I completely relate to what you're saying, and I'm sure a lot of us here are
burdened by the painful feelings you've expressed. Thank you for sharing. I
think the primary cause is the 24/7 news cycle bombarding us incessantly with
negative and depressing information. It's extremely unpleasant to bear,
particularly when you're sensitive or vulnerable to the sufferings of
humanity. I've found it's best to take vacations from it all--to tune it out
completely for intervals--and focus entirely on work or the things you love.
If you perchance have trouble avoiding news sites or social networks, as I
have in the past, I've found an extension like StayFocusd to be really helpful
([https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/stayfocusd/laankej...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/stayfocusd/laankejkbhbdhmipfmgcngdelahlfoji?hl=en))

~~~
computerjunkie
Thanks for the reply, I do agree its the negativity everywhere being thrown at
us, it really takes a toll on people who really care about these things.

I already do avoid news sites and news papers when possible, thanks for the
advice and the extension recommendation

------
p01926
David Cameron wasn't just arguing against encrypted messaging apps; he would
like to ban secret online communication in general. It will be interesting to
see how he squares this with bolstering cybersecurity, which he'll be
discussing with Barak Obama later this week.

How can we explain to politicians the extent to which modernity is built upon
tools like encryption? How can we explain the brute fact of the possibility of
secret communication, whether they approve or not? And can we guess how much
damage they'll inflict in these Canutian escapades?

~~~
forgottenpass
_It will be interesting to see how he squares this with bolstering
cybersecurity_

With a lie to placate the people, if he tries at all. Government (like the
snooping corporations before them) only want "nobody but us" levels of
security. Some countries have already manged to get it from some services (off
the top of my head BBM and India).

------
k-mcgrady
This after attending the march in France for liberty and freedom of speech.
Hypocrite.

It's also worth mentioning the Mayor of London's thoughts on this:

"I'm not particularly interested in this civil liberties stuff when it comes
to these people's emails and mobile phone conversations. If they are a threat
to our society then I want them properly listened to."

~~~
stephenr
One only needs to watch Boris Johnson (mayor of London) in his top gear
appearance several years ago (just the driving part is enough) to understand
how utterly stupid this man is.

He is a trained seal that performs for treats.

~~~
k-mcgrady
I used to think that but I read somewhere an ex-employee said that it's all an
act. If it is clearly it works because he's liked by too many people. The
worry of course is that it's likely he'll end up running for Prime Minister
someday soon.

~~~
stephenr
Whether he's an idiot who acts like an idiot or a genius who acts like an
idiot so people like him, he's still acting like an idiot.

Just further evidence that politicians are inherently crazy, by their nature
of wanting to be politicians

------
chrisdone
I don't anticipate Brits will be hitting the streets in the name of right to
privacy and net neutrality as the French have done for right to free speech,
though. We are a cowardly, dull bunch, with little regard for our liberty, I'm
afraid. We are matched in this only by our leaders' outmoded worldviews.

~~~
Jimmed
I want so very much to disagree with you here, but I can't find the words to
do so.

This probably means you're right. I suggest we start a mass exodus to another
country with equally melancholy weather and the guarantee of a Waitrose
nearby.

~~~
fit2rule
Don't bother with the typical UK-expat landing zones: Australia, New Zealand,
Santa Monica. These spots are already usurped by the fascists alas...

------
higherpurpose
> Yet in a sign that tech companies are coming under increased scrutiny,
> British lawmakers blamed Facebook in November for failing to tell the
> country’s authorities about specific online threats made by two men, who
> later killed a soldier in London in 2013.

That seems misleading. From what I remember they were accusing Facebook not of
"refusing to give them the info", but for "not warning them" about those guys'
communications. So they essentially wanted Facebook to do the policing for
them, because they failed to do the policing themselves.

------
marlinspire
According to Snowden and subsequent whistleblowers considerable resources are
tasked to obsessing over political opponents , groups such as Occupy , anti-
fracking and even competing business interests are targeted.

In Britain the Security Forces have long been seen as a bit too obsessed with
lefties.

There is inneffective Security Theatre at airports - a political sop. What
else is inneffective? Are there innefective secret things ?

I would like to see any journalist ask : Are the security services watching
radical Islam enough or wasting their resources on what the electorate would
consider the wrong targets ?

Will the Security Services having decryption keys to my communications make
them more insecure to non-government agents ?

Will how secure the keys are be secret ?

What other governments , agencies and contractors will the keys to our
communications be shared with ?

What oversight will there be ?

------
MarcScott
I wonder if I were to locally encrypt a message using AES and then send it via
email to a friend, using a pre-shared key, whether I would be breaking the law
or not, in Cameron's Brave New World?

If the answer is yes, then how about the Vigenere cipher? The Caesar Cipher?
1337 speak? Writing my message backwards? Making spelling mistakes?

~~~
pizzeys
Heaven forbid you use a one-time pad...

------
eterm
Already discussed at
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8874624](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8874624)
although I think that one is being negatively scored for the high number of
(low upvote) comments.

------
underpants
That's a fine whitelist of messaging systems to use if there ever was one!

~~~
dsl
Snapchat at least is already known to be vulnerable to simple attacks, so I
wouldn't put too much weight behind this list.

He is likely just using common examples that people recognize, and the law
will be applied broadly to apps like RedPhone and SilentText.

------
AdeptusAquinas
This sort of thing seems a bit like banning Napster. Eliminating the products
doesn't eliminate the technology - although I expect the bigger players like
Facebook to push back on this so as not to be out competed by smaller
companies that care less about adhering to such 'blunt force' laws.

------
MLR
It'll never get any traction, the porn filters got through because pretty much
no voting adults were bothered by it.

Very different scenario when it's something that people actually use,
especially with elections coming up.

------
Sir_Substance
This is good news!

By watching which messaging tools are banned in the UK, we will have a
canonical list of which messaging tools GCHQ cannot breach.

Thanks David!

~~~
the8472
It's more likely that it would be a blanket ban even covering applications
that are not particularly hardened simply because they don't have any official
wiretapping capability.

------
D4AHNGM
If most of the UK didn't already think Cameron was an arse this could really
damage his reputation.

