[cryptome] Re: [cryptography] What Is Good Encryption Software?

  • From: Shaun O'Connor <capricorn8159@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2014 12:03:38 +0000

Hi Douggie

...and for a little light entertainment from the very esteemed Duncan



On 29/11/2014 11:12, doug wrote:
> Hi Shaun,
> TPIM: Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures.
> Tx for the urls and information, the first url is about a certain
> Queen's Counsel touting for more work as...if not the conscience of
> the nation...he is certainly the leader of the conscience of the
> nation (though in all modesty, he denies it).  Apparently, he is an
> expert on such matters, as well as being independent, and a
> go-between, between the government and the committee...which he
> considers is the real conscience of the nation, in particular, the
> Baroness of The Shaws (ever read Kidnapped by Robert Louis
> Stevenson?).  All about protecting civil liberties and catching the
> terrorist...by creating, or adapting laws to restrict people's
> liberties without having to resort to the courts, and allowing for
> minimum suspicion and minimum review of the suspects case before it is
> decided or reviewed...in secret.  Franz Kafka and "The Trial" resounds
> here.  The second prong is about how to make it all cost effective. 
> Apparently, the government got a  pasting with its relocation orders
> under the old system and it is rumoured that it cost tens of millions
> of pounds in payouts to the suspected terrorists.  One or two of the
> suspects went on the run, others went to the courts with a Q.C. now
> retired, representing them, having the temerity to complain about a
> breach of their family life.  A very highly educated woman, with a
> very posh Cheltenham accent and very much an establishment lady of
> Cheltenham Ladies College,  who, amongst other things, such as being
> Sartre's Waiter, was also an accomplished academic in the area of
> civil liberties, smashed huge holes in the previous Control Orders,
> via the courts.  A very special lady, she even put some of the
> suspected terrorists up in her home, whilst the cases were being
> conducted. Just goes to show that one mans suspected terrorist is
> another woman's source of income...
> Now that she has retired, the mice have come out to play and they (the
> Home Office and the Govt) are now trying to tidy up the legislation,
> narrow it down to those bits which have been approved by the courts. 
> They aren't in a rush, but most of it has been thrashed out
> previously...see above.  And they will probably pass it into law in
> the "clean up" (I have forgotten the name they use, but the same
> process was used under the last government to introduce the
> controversial aspects of the Copyright legislation) legislation, just
> before Parliament resigns in order to conduct a General Election in
> May 2015.  Nuffink to worry about really.  We have had worse, during
> the Irish problems, and at least we aren't as yet creating "H" blocks.
> What is noticeable is that they wish to return to the relocation
> process which cost so much money.  This is because they think that by
> moving the suspect away from home, he/she cannot contact their peers. 
> And though they wish to protect the civil liberties of the nation,
> they have as yet, not understood, what it would be like to have a
> suspected terrorist living next door to one in a block of flats.  With
> the residents thereof, not knowing of their background, just like they
> do for child molestors. Such a policy can be very dangerous and pose a
> real threat, as supervision is envisaged as an electronic tag and a
> piece of paper.  Still, they might just decide to organise a shelter
> for them at No.12 Downing Street, or next to the Home Office...who
> knows...:-).
> The third prong is if or how they can prevent suspected terrorists who
> are British Subjects, from returning home, by detaining and
> questioning them or removing their passports, before or after leaving
> the terrorist war.  And whether other countries might take up our
> example and start detaining British Subjects and taking away their
> passports in the name of terrorism...Difficult questions...
> Dougie.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gareth_Peirce
> On 29/11/14 00:46, Shaun O'Connor wrote:
>> here goes Douggie
>> first is the committee report(pdf)
>> http://www.parliament.uk/documents/joint-committees/human-rights/Daivd_Anderson_Transcript_271114.pdf
>> and here is the info about the proposed  legislation in question.
>> http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2014-15/counterterrorismandsecurity.html
>> happy reading Douggie
>> ATB
>> Shaun
>> On 28/f11/2014 23:19, doug wrote:
>>> Hi Shaun,
>>> Care to expand...a url...perhaps.  Stakeholders is certainly a
>>> Labour term...Blair and all that.  The Tories using it sounds
>>> most...auger us.
>>> ATB
>>> Dougie.
>>> Hi Douggie
>>> Things are getting quite, erm interesting here in the uk, a piece of
>>> legislation is being rushed through our parliament, but heres the
>>> interesting bit although it is being rushed through it is not
>>> classified as urgent. also comments have been made to the effect
>>> that, for a draft bill. parts appear to be very well developed. even
>>> more intriguing is that this piece of proposed legislation dealing
>>> with widening powers perportedly in the name of counterterrorisim.
>>> appears to be supported by "stakeholders" a rather odd anomaly for a
>>> government bill supposedly drafted in conjunction with or on the
>>> advice of the UK security services. I think I have the pdf's
>>> somewhere both of the proposed bill, the explanatory notes and a
>>> draft committee meeting discussing the bill.
>>> ATB
>>> Shaun
>> -- 
>> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/11/when-time-comes-we-need-be-ready-fight-tpps-secret-anti-user-agenda


Other related posts: