THINKING ABOUT TERROR MADE ILLEGAL: In England and coming to Germany
A proposal to scan suspect hard drives causes unease in [Germany]," read a recent frontpage story in the Los Angeles Times. Positioned boldly above the fold, the reporter, Kim Murphy, and editors recognized the potential keen interest in anything having to do with the implementation of snooping in "My Documents".
In the United Kingdom it's no longer surprising to find that in the absence of significant physical evidence, documents, weblinks and cached pages found on suspects' hard disks are enough to send them over on terror charges.
In the conviction of Scottish student Mohammed Atif Siddique, a source recently informs that publicized terror writings on the man's computer existed as links on pages - never mounted on the web - pointing to copies of jihadi materials published on the scholarly site, Project for the Research of Islamist Movements.
If one is to nip terror in the bud, goes the reasoning, then it follows that one ought to be able to reach out and secretly snoop on the virtual material stored on the hard disks of suspected terrorists.
"What if terrorists were planning to use a nuclear weapon?" continues the script.
Wouldn't you want your government to have the tools to look inside the computers of plotters before having to raid their apartments, potentially tipping them off and accelerating the attack?
That's the reasoning put forward in the LA Times news report, delivered via German counter-terror men who want to have the capacity to put trojan horses on computers in that country, programs to scan those under suspicion.
Invoking the threat of a nuclear weapon is the most common trump card played. It destroys all reasonable thinking. If you're not for unlimited surveillance, you're for the terrorists and their plans. And when the next bomb goes off, the blood will be on your hands.
Read what's wrong with this picture at El Reg here.
And you surely won't want to miss UK Teenager Hooked on Terror Beef.
A proposal to scan suspect hard drives causes unease in [Germany]," read a recent frontpage story in the Los Angeles Times. Positioned boldly above the fold, the reporter, Kim Murphy, and editors recognized the potential keen interest in anything having to do with the implementation of snooping in "My Documents".
In the United Kingdom it's no longer surprising to find that in the absence of significant physical evidence, documents, weblinks and cached pages found on suspects' hard disks are enough to send them over on terror charges.
In the conviction of Scottish student Mohammed Atif Siddique, a source recently informs that publicized terror writings on the man's computer existed as links on pages - never mounted on the web - pointing to copies of jihadi materials published on the scholarly site, Project for the Research of Islamist Movements.
If one is to nip terror in the bud, goes the reasoning, then it follows that one ought to be able to reach out and secretly snoop on the virtual material stored on the hard disks of suspected terrorists.
"What if terrorists were planning to use a nuclear weapon?" continues the script.
Wouldn't you want your government to have the tools to look inside the computers of plotters before having to raid their apartments, potentially tipping them off and accelerating the attack?
That's the reasoning put forward in the LA Times news report, delivered via German counter-terror men who want to have the capacity to put trojan horses on computers in that country, programs to scan those under suspicion.
Invoking the threat of a nuclear weapon is the most common trump card played. It destroys all reasonable thinking. If you're not for unlimited surveillance, you're for the terrorists and their plans. And when the next bomb goes off, the blood will be on your hands.
Read what's wrong with this picture at El Reg here.
And you surely won't want to miss UK Teenager Hooked on Terror Beef.
posted by George Smith at 5:28 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home