Theresa May - Snoopers Charter 2
Civil Liberties

The Investigatory Powers Bill will tell the police you read this blog

 

The mainstream media is full of stories of checks and balances, U-turns and climbdowns. The so-called Snooper’s Charter (aka Investigatory Powers Bill) will target only terrorists and extremists, we are told. They might go for paedophiles, too. And maybe rapists. The Bill is imperative to ensuring national security and individual safety; indispensable to the agencies of government and law enforcement. The state must have the power to snoop on your browsing history or paedophiles will rape our children and Islamists will blow us all up. It’s as simple as that.

Oh, there’ll be warrants and judges and courts involved somewhere in the process. At least we are told so. Such ‘independence’ is crucial for the maintenance of our civil liberties and the integrity of liberal democracy: the Home Secretary ought not to discover what sites you visit or what apps you use without a judge decreeing that she may. But Theresa May might just find that a tad inconvenient: the police must be free to investigate, and so they must be given the powers they deem necessary to pursue their investigation. Far easier if politicians and police may spy on our browsing history. And if them, why not the local council and HMRC? And if them, why not schools, hospitals, doctors’ surgeries, social workers, banks and employers? Is there not a plethora of legitimate reasons to check the online life of the cyber-individual?

The government doesn’t want to know what underwear you buy from Mark & Spencer or what potatoes you prefer from Tesco. But they will be very interested indeed in the prescription drugs you purchase from online chemists; the fertiliser you buy for your garden; the acid you need to unblock a drain; the video games you allow your children to play; the sex sites you visit; the emails you send, and the networks of relationships you form in the Blogosphere. And God help you if you’re an investigative journalist pursuing a story of corruption in the police or collusion in Parliament. You will be spied on, harassed and ultimately silenced.

It seems that all internet companies will be obliged by statute to store all your browsing data for a year (or more), even un-encrypted, to facilitate the surveillance agencies of the state. And that’ll be safe and secure, won’t it? No question at all that bored teenagers might be able to hack into the impregnable servers of a communications giant like, say, TalkTalk.

But here’s the thing. David Cameron and Theresa May are not only concerned with Islamists and paedophiles, but with all extremists, including non-violent extremists. And they are intent on arresting those pesky non-violent extremists who do not quite break the law. As Theresa May has explained:

..to live in a modern liberal state is not to live in a moral vacuum. We have to stand up for our values as a nation. There will, I know, be some who say that what I describe as extremism is merely social conservatism. But if others described a woman’s intellect as “deficient”, denounced people on the basis of their religious beliefs, or rejected the democratic process, we would quite rightly condemn their bigotry. And there will be others who say I am wrong to link these kinds of beliefs with the violent extremism we agree we must confront. To them I say, yes, not all extremism leads to violence. And not all extremists are violent. But the damage extremists cause to our society is reason enough to act. And there is, undoubtedly, a thread that binds the kind of extremism that promotes intolerance, hatred and a sense of superiority over others to the actions of those who want to impose their values on us through violence.

‘Extremism’ is anything that deviates from the orthodox norms as defined by the ever-self-enlightening state. To teach ‘intolerant’ moral orthodoxy or to advocate for the ‘bigoted’ traditional heterosexual marriage union is now considered ‘extreme’. There is no freedom of religion in the new creed of British values. We must all be normalised: our worldview must be shaped to conform to the new statist ideology. Those who resist are, by definition, ‘extremists’, hell bent on hating the values and precepts of the secular, neutral state, even if they remain within the law. Those who peddle hatred are ‘cult leaders’, according to David Cameron, who appears to define ‘cult’ as any group that demurs (even non-violently) from the values of the state.

So, Christian non-violent extremists beware. Your non-violent visits to the non-violent Archbishop Cranmer blog will soon be monitored, recorded and stored for a year (or more), and may be acquired by politicians and/or the police and given in evidence against you in a court of law. Criminalising Christians is imperative to destroying the Caliphate.

  • len

    Time for Christians to ‘come out’ and to become ‘salt’ and ‘light’ to our ever darkening broken society which can only be redeemed by Jesus Christ (even more so now we have a wider audience) 😉

    • Jon Sorensen

      The salt might have lost it’s saltiness, and remember when Christians had the absolute rule over Europe it was called the Dark Ages for a reason.

      • Ivan M

        There were no Dark Ages. Update your reading now and then Jon. The Universal Church as the successor to the Roman Empire absorbed wave after wave of barbarian invaders and found time to lay the foundations for the eventual rise of the West.

        • Jon Sorensen

          Of course Christians just try to rewrite the history. The fact is Christians got and stayed in power in power in Europe 400-1100AD. That was the time science declined and Christians ruled. It was a bad time to be an European…

          Age of Enlightenment was the time Christians got competition from reason.

          • Ivan M

            Protestants rewrote history to make out what were later called Catholics as pig-ignorant fools. This is the summary of what you take to be the Dark Ages. Many now realise that they went overboard with it. But fellows like you prefer to hew to what is after all at base Protestant propaganda. This is similar to the junk that Muslims peddle, when they claim that all was darkness before they came.

            Incidentally, the Muslims are one of the prime causes of the “Dark Ages” if not the major one, as they cut off Mediterranean access for Christians from their cultural centres in the East and North Africa, dividing East and West, forcing Christians to pursue martial ends, instead of writing poetry and science. From that series of staggering and rolling defeats imposed by the Muslims, seen as the end of the World by Christians, they painfully recovered and it was millenia long, under the guidance of the Roman Church. Without the nurture and protection of the Popes and their legatees there would be no universities to speak off. Nowhere for all the knowledge and argumentation and philosophies to develop what later became the Scientific Revolution. It was a dialectical process no doubt. The son rebelled against the father, but without the father, the son would not exist.

          • Jon Sorensen

            “But fellows like you prefer to hew to what is after all at base Protestant propaganda.”
            Complete nonsense. But it you are up to it please name some Christian inventions or scientist from 330 – 1250AD so after Constantine the Great but before Roger Bacon. If it is only propaganda this should be easy for you.

            “Incidentally, the Muslims are one of the prime causes of the “Dark Ages””
            So now you agree with your “propaganda”. Make up your mind.

            In reality Muslims make scientific and social advances which Christians ignored.

            ” Without the nurture and protection of the Popes and their legatees there would be no universities to speak off.”
            Nonsense. There were no universities in Christian world in the Dark Ages. Muslims had universities in the Dark Ages. Christian fathers were against scientific investigation of nature.

          • Ivan M

            So now you agree with your “propaganda”…
            Parse it properly. I used quotes, precisely to indicate that I do not believe there was a Dark Age. I have no interest in the alleged capabilities of Muslims, mostly derivative and trumpeted beyond reason.

          • Jon Sorensen

            So what did the Muslims do that was one of the prime causes of the “Dark Ages”?
            Did they do good and “Dark Ages” was good times?
            Or did they do bad and “Dark Ages” was bad times?

          • Ivan M

            It is recorded for one, that papyrii from Egypt became unavailable, forcing scholars to make do with parchment. It is like you having no paper to write down your thoughts on. And if you indeed feel strongly about it, have to kill a ram, clean out his skin, dry it in sun, hold your nose from the horrible stench as you brush it down. By which time you may decide that it was not worth it anyway.

            Einstein claimed that his pencil was smarter than him. What that genius meant was that without his writing material he would not be able to produce even a small fraction of his eventual output. Imagine doing the tensor calculus in your head!

            Something as prosaic as this goes a long way to explain the lack of recorded European publications. And you have to realise that Islamic scholars in their turn would be plied with female (Christian) slaves by the Sultan have all their grunt work done by male (Christian) slaves, I too can become a scholar in these circumstances.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Rich Christian and Muslims had their slaves and both societies had problems with writing material (like Greeks), but somehow Muslims managed to develop science and universities, while Christians failed.

            I note that you did not answer:
            So what did the Muslims do that was one of the prime causes of the “Dark Ages”?
            and
            “But it you are up to it please name some Christian inventions or
            scientist from 330 – 1250AD so after Constantine the Great but before
            Roger Bacon.”

          • Ivan M

            What have you invented? Is it of any moment? The meaning of the Dark Ages as you use it, is to denigrate the Christians of that era as rutting fools under drunken, whorish priests. The same as when some others denigrate the Russians under the Tsars, with no sympathy or appreciation of their circumstance or difficulties.

            I don’t do any kiddie internet searches, you have to do it on your own. But I can recommend one book among others, A Culture of Improvement by Robert Friedel. This shows the high technical ability and intelligence of the Europeans during that era. Or the work of the historian Le Goff of the Anneles School of whom I read casually many years ago. Or A History of Mechanics by Rene Dugas for the era preceding Roger Bacon. Very little though of AD 350 etc, since that was the childhood of the race.

          • Jon Sorensen

            So I guess you can’t name a single Christian time invention or scientist, so you want to go read a book which does not have answer. Looks like it was the Dark Ages after all.

            I read God’s Philosophers by James Hannam which was supposed to be about Christians invention during that time but fact checking his claims just showed how bad it was.

            It’s irrelevant but I did invented something, it is a unique program algorithm.

          • Ivan M

            An algorithm? I hope you did not take out a patent on it.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Whenever there is a discussion about the Dark Age, Christians pop up and tell that “there were no Dark Ages”. When I challenge them to tell about Christian scientists or inventions they mumble, ask me to read some books and run away from that discussion. Always.

            So I assume you can’t name a single Christian Dark Age invention or scientist, but still believe there were no Dark Age.

  • The Explorer

    When Bletchley Park broke the German code it was important not to let the Germans know that the code had been broken, because then the flow of information would cease.

    So a blog like Cranmer must present the British authorities with a conundrum. Do you close it down as a hotbed of extremism; or do you leave it open so that you can gather evidence about the radicals who visit it?

    Must be hell being in government. Imagine being faced with that sort of decision.

  • Busy Mum

    Would Teresa May denounce somebody’s religious beliefs if said beliefs rejected the democratic process? I assume she can answer this question, as a woman’s intellect has to be taken for granted…

    Her sophistry assumes a deficient intellect on the part of everybody but herself.

    • The Explorer

      Thought Police Memo. Busy Mum. Retain this post as evidence of subversion.

      • Busy Mum

        I have just been typing up some quotes by our host’s brothers, Latimer, Ridley and Hooper, in order to ‘support’ my son in his RE homework. I was obviously inspired by that glorious spirit of Protestantism to be bold, and play the man.

  • The Explorer

    At least the current orthodox norms do not yet align with those of the Caliphate. When they do, the end will be near.

  • Darter Noster

    Internet Service Providers have been recording that data and handing it over to the police on request for years. It tells them what site you visited, but not which individual pages you read, thus: they will know you visited archbishopcranmer.com, but not archbishopcranmer.com/secret-plot-to-impose-ukip-dictatorship/, for example.

    In order to find out what content you’ve been viewing they’ll have to seize and forensically examine your hardware, which they’ve also been doing for years. A big problem they’re having is that devices such as iPads are so well encrypted by the manufacturers, who have refused to share the keys, that unless you voluntarily surrender the passcode they can’t access what’s on it. If you refuse to surrender it you can be locked up for up to 2 years, which would seem to be a major violation of the law on not having to incriminate yourself.

    In any case, the only people affected by it will be ordinary people who find themselves in the wrong place, because any serious internet criminal will either be proxy-servered up to the eyeballs anyway, or based somewhere the British authorities have no jurisdiction.

    • Politically__Incorrect

      Agreed. Those who are a real threat to this country will still find a way to conceal their activities, while the less IT savvy users will get caught for no reason other than having a different point of view. I doubt the security services will gain much from this law though. The sheer volume of data that would need to be accessed and analysed is going to be so overwhelming that they will only be able to target selected individuals.

      Will we see communicants on this site hauled off to the Ministry of Love for a bit of tender re-education on issues like gay “marriage”? I suspect the security services will have more pressing matters to attend to anyway. Also, if Cameron really wants to turn this country into another North Korea, I suspect he will have the British love of Liberty and the right to privacy to deal with. We are not used to being a totalitarian state, and it won’t go down easily.

      • Anton

        No. It will go down incrementally.

    • Jon Sorensen

      It hard to believe the UK would have such an ancient surveillance systems. What you describe was 20 years ago. Snowden reports indicate otherwise.

      Even iphones can be hacked remotely
      http://www.theverge.com/2015/11/3/9662978/iphone-bounty-one-million-dollars-claimed

      • The Explorer

        Good point. Suppose you can hack everybody. The question then is, whom do you choose, given finite personnel? What I understand this post to be about is deciding who constitutes a threat to society.

        As to priority, you are the police, and you get two simultaneous alerts. One is about a murder, and the other is about an insult to a transsexual. Obviously, you investigate the tranny incident first, because that is the more important of the two.

        • Jon Sorensen

          Most of surveillance (data and metadata collection, basic investigation, reporting, group analysis, storage) is automated adding more people to in is only a very small incremental world. Targeted monitoring (hacking, call routing and monitoring, tracking deeper analysis) is more resource consuming but once you have a system in place let’s say monitoring 10000 people doubling that to 20000 will not require double the workforce. And most of the work can be outsource to contractors anyways. You will never be in a situations “you are the police, and you get two simultaneous alerts. which one to investigate?”. It’s a different world now, personnel is not any more “finite”. Snowden files clearly show how that works.

          • The Explorer

            Lighten up on that Scandinavian solemnity. Do you think I’m serious that the police, even in modern Britain, would consider murder less important than an incident involving a tranny?

          • Jon Sorensen

            No I didn’t. That’s why I didn’t comment it.

            My comment was more about your outdated view of resourcing.

          • Inspector General

            Still being a public nuisance then. Why?

          • Jon Sorensen

            I don’t you are a public nuisance 😉

          • The Explorer

            Given it’s your fourth language, you do very well: much better than we could in reverse.

          • The Explorer

            Okay, the humour bit was unfair. My apologies.
            My point wasn’t about resourcing, but about choice.

            Let’s try a different example. You go to the local library and take out five books. Old method. Or you download five hundred on your Kindle. New method. Either way, there’s lots of books, one of you, and time is moving in one direction. You have to make a choice/value judgement call it what you will, about the order in which you will read them. Confronted with the same set of books, someone else might choose to read them in a different order.

          • Jon Sorensen

            In a new [NSA and GCHQ surveillance] model they don’t have to make a choice. The can read [and analyse automatically] all those 500 books faster than you can read 5 books. When the reading is automated one person can read 1000s of books faster than you can read one.

          • The Explorer

            Okay, so they analyse. What criteria for analysis do they use?
            In Oscar Wilde’s day, homosexuals were imprisoned, and those who condemned them were praised. Now homosexuals are praised, and those who condemn them are imprisoned. Depending on what value system you are applying, different types of people will end up getting punished.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Who in the UK is imprisoned for condemning homosexuals?

            “What criteria for analysis do they use?”
            Basics are simple. You have the seed list; convicted experienced criminals, terrorists, known drug dealers etc. Just from metadata you can get their social network and when they or their friends change phones or phone numbers metadata will give them away. Metadata can also lead you to organizational leader or the contact people with two criminal groups. Metadata also links you to your location at any given time; (which mosque you go to and when?). The other starting point is locations. Phone calls to/from Syria only go to trusted people or relatives. Location can also be a ISIS twitter feed, web site or forum. Monitoring who goes to ISIS web site and uses https could indicate that they have user level access to that.

            So with some basic algorithms you can create automatically network of interesting targets and the key nodes/telephone numbers in these networks. That gives you a set of fairly manageable targets you can get more than meta data i.e. content voice/data/messages. Voice is converted to text automatically. All text is analyzed with key words and names to find material etc. All these can be done automatically or minimum resources today.

          • The Explorer

            I was the thinking of the anti-gay street preacher arrested in Basildon; although, to be fair, he was subsequently awarded £13 000 for wrongful imprisonment.

          • Jon Sorensen

            I think people condemning homosexuals are fairly safe in modern world. But there are countries that being homosexuals will get you killed or jailed. I think Churches can discriminate against gays, but gay bars can’t discriminate Christians…

      • Darter Noster

        Hacked, yes, when they’re online and therefore targetable, usually by things like phishing emails, in which the user places the virus on their own device unwittingly. But trying to access the hardware itself when the device is switched off and locked in order to forensically examine its contents is much trickier due to the passcode encryption being extremely good and routinely updated. Apple and Samsung have repeatedly refused to share the keys with law enforcement.

        • Jon Sorensen

          Well you didn’t read link did you. No need for phishing emails or old fashion viruses. Your latest iPhone can be access remotely anytime by a third party. And you are not dealing with law enforcement when your adversary is NSA or GCHQ. Remember they collect everything going in and out of your phone or PC while you use it and keep the data. They know where the devices are at any given time. They can turn on the mic and camera, read what you type from screen before encryption, and listening bluetooth and USB connections. They can even hack it if they think they missed some data. NSA and GCHQ don’t generally need the keys to your mobile encryption to get you. Remember Italians uncovered the US goverment planned kidnapping operation just from phone meta data analysis from 2008.

          Wut.. you upvote your own comment? Nice hack…

          • Darter Noster

            No, I didn’t up vote my own comment. I did read the link; that requires users to go to a website. That is a phone which is on, unlocked and in use. I’m talking about accessing a phone or tablet which is switched off and locked, but has been seize by police. An old-fashioned hard drive could be removed and scanned, but a phone or tablet is different. Unless you unlock it it won’t connect to the Internet, and even the finest hacker cannot hack something which is not connected, or know where something is if it is switched off.

          • Jon Sorensen

            “No, I didn’t up vote my own comment.”
            LOL
            http://i.imgur.com/9tNqzUy.png

            “I did read the link; that requires users to go to a website.”
            Then don’t comment it and stay ignorant. So you don’t go to websites. I see.

            “I’m talking about accessing a phone or tablet which is switched off and locked”
            So you think NSA and GCHQ. Do you think you can turn off your iPhone after they have hacked it? How would you even tell if it is off or hibernating. You can’t even remove the battery.

            “Unless you unlock it it won’t connect to the Internet, and even the finest hacker cannot hack something which is not connected, or know where something is if it is switched off”
            Except an average user can’t tell if it is connected, switched off or physically tampered.

            Locked drives might inaccessible to most agencies, but TrueCrypt story is worth reading… but you don’t go to websites…

          • Darter Noster

            Wow, you really have got the bit between your teeth, for some unknown reason.

            Fine, I didn’t knowingly up vote my own comment – I must have done it by accident as I use a tablet and scroll by touching the screen. Why I would deliberately up vote myself knowing that it can be discovered so easily? What the hell is your problem?

            Secondly, why don’t you learn to read English properly before you start having a go? I DID – repeat, DID – read the article you linked to; what part of that wasn’t clear? The VIRUS IN THAT ARTICLE requires users to go to a website in order to get it – why the hell would I have a problem with going to websites? I’m on one now!!!!! Why you seem so desperate to score cheap points over this is beyond me, but trying to do so whilst completely misunderstanding what the other person has written makes you look a bit of a prick.

            What exactly are you trying to prove? I know there are viruses out there which can be used to hack phones and tablets; I am referring to one specific problem in which police seize devices but then cannot get into them because companies like Apple and Samsung won’t share the encryption keys. You can get up to 2 years in prison for refusing to hand over your passcode. It’s a fact.

            I’m not disagreeing with you or trying to start an argument; we’re just talking about different things, so why don’t you grow up and and stop the playground sneering?

          • Jon Sorensen

            Sorry. I was a bit too aggressive there. I apologise.

            The point of the article is that attacker does not need a virus. They just connect straight to the phone.

          • Darter Noster

            No worries dude – happens to all of us :o)

            I do take your point.

    • DanJ0

      There are commercially available content destroyers, such as Steganos, which allows you to maintain a clean machine if used regularly. They also provide an anonymiser for private browsing I think, though that is more likely to drawn attention I’d have thought.

  • Ian G

    Good to see Cranmer challenging the State.Risky business, his predecessor got burnt for his pains.

  • Albert

    By the standards of a liberal state, this is itself damaging and extreme:

    To them I say, yes, not all extremism leads to violence. And not all extremists are violent. But the damage extremists cause to our society is reason enough to act.

    Therefore it cannot stand on its own terms.

    • William Lewis

      Quite. They want to protect the values of our liberal state by turning it into an authoritarian one. Oops.

  • My concern is not that the security services are spying on what I do, if indeed they can be bothered with me, but other government departments, statutory authorities, local councils and all the rest. I believe the security services are doing their best to protect the citizens of this country, and I trust that they will continue to do so.
    As to arguments that some (unidentified) future extremist government might use the information against its citizens in general, I am less concerned about that than I am about the terrorist threat, which in the limit could bring about that extremist (Islamic?) government we all fear.

  • Criminalising Christians is imperative to destroying the Caliphate

    Rather, it’s a case of criminalizing all opposition to establishing the Caliphate. Europe’s ruling classes didn’t import Islam for the fun of it, they did it knowing full well that it would eventually choke Christianity to death, as it has on nearly every occasion the two faiths have gone head-to-head. As a bonus, Third World immigration will also choke the white race to death. <irony>What’s not to like?</irony>

    As Gerald Warner observed in 2010, ‘No section of society has done more to destroy our country than the six hundred odd consensual, complicit villains at Westminster.’ Ditto the villains in the legislatures of every white Christian nation.

    • The Explorer

      It’s a discussion we’ve had before on this blog. The villainy of the 600 is not in question. What is in question is whether they did it because they knew what they were doing, or because they didn’t know what they were doing. Or because some did know, and some didn’t.

      • @ The Explorer—I was once inclined to give politicians of the immediate post-war period the benefit of the doubt; in your words, ‘they didn’t know what they were doing.’ That is almost certainly true of some of the lobby fodder, the crusty colonels and dim-witted dames, but those in government knew exactly what they were doing, and why. Today, with the intended consequences of multiculturalism plain for all to see, benefit of the doubt has been withdrawn.

    • Inspector General

      JR, one finds irony in that vast number of muslims were imported to propagate and develop benign socialism, to replace all that we hold dear, but their Islamic militants menacing presence in England is the very stuff which will consign such socialism to the scrap heap and bloody good riddance to it too. To be replaced by a new order based on individuality of the person, unity of the family, and the glorious white culture that thankfully sets our peoples apart from the brutal barbarians to be found in other climes.

      If only we could once again make abortion illegal and stop aborting ourselves out of existence. Then everything would soon be tickety boo…

      • @ IG—The growing popularity of nationalist parties suggests that all manner of disagreeableness, from socialism to multiculturalism, will be heading for the scrapheap. The Mad Mutti’s high-speed Islamization of Germany may well be an attempt to inflict as much damage as possible on Germany and Europe before nationalism prevails.

        • Inspector General

          Oh how one wishes that Churchill was Prime Minister and that the Inspectorate was responsible for writing his speeches…

          “We will do whatever it takes to keep the population of this magnificent island nation secure. To those who are recent immigrants or sons thereof, and are so moved to prevaricate, I say this to you. Come over to us and become true Britons. Or leave. To go back to your land of origin and where you will be the better content.”

  • Orwell Ian

    This
    proposal says much about the insecurity felt by those who think they
    govern and are becoming increasingly desperate to keep the lid on
    events beyond their control. British values, they can never define
    them because the nation has fragmented into disparate communities and
    factions with their own values and norms. The seismic shocks of mass
    migration and reckless social engineering have polarised opinion,
    causing dangerous faultlines to develop but snooping on anyone and
    everyone will increase mistrust and resentment towards those now
    choosing to rule us instead of governing us. Clamping down on freedom
    of speech, protest, and the right to hold contrary opinions is no way
    to safeguard democracy. One does not destroy freedom in order to save
    it.

  • IanCad

    And about time too!!

    Thank the spirits for Keys May.
    Perhaps this will be the first step in getting this hateful and hurtful blog shut down.

    It brings me to tears when I scan the horrifying comments. So intolerant, cruel and beastly.
    Just to review a few examples on any day would give any left thinking person the motivation to activate now!

    There is a hateful fundamentalist protestant who never misses a swipe at the poor catholics.
    Sadly some of those victims respond in kind and are equally aggressive.

    Daily these neanderthals are sniping at those who embrace the principles of inclusivity, equality and diversity and threaten to stifle the nuturing and maturing of our enlightenment.

    Oh – I can hardly bear it – the Homophobia. Shocking, hurtful and primitive. So successful are these bigots that even one of our own Friends of Fry regularly supports the libertarian wing of the blog. Poor deluded, corrupted innocent.

    Then there are the names; hardly concealing the inner horridness they represent. An Explorer; fantasizing no doubt, about the empire and exploitation of peoples of colour. A Dreadnaught ever pointing his guns at our poor Muslim immigrants. A Sarky, making light of the meanest form of dialogue.

    An Irish rebel; a mum who betrays her gender. A strange man who inspects Gia knows what. A preacher who insolently professes his delusions. So many more. I can hardly continue.

    My avocado and durian smoothie, and the hugs and tears of my progressive friends, have given me the resolve to carry on this emotional nightmare. I have promised myself to book tickets for Glastonbury when I have finished.

    A foreign element is even present. There is a Canadian – A Jew, who never neglects an opportunity to belittle the poor brutalized Palestinians. And, an american who presents his screeds with a veneer of respectability, but at heart appears to respect their oppressive constitution. That means guns.

    Please, please my friends, don’t worry about me. My aroma therapist is coming this afternoon. Say Hi to everyone at the Student Union.

    Sorry YG, It has been raining so couldn’t work.

    • David

      Your worryingly good at that stuff.
      They’ll be watching you !

      • The Explorer

        They’ll be recruiting him.

      • IanCad

        Thanks David,
        Funny thing is, that avocado/durian smoothie was about as revolting a concoction as I could imagine.
        What do you know!! Saints preserve us!! There is such a thing.

    • Ivan M

      You get the sheriff’s badge for today.

  • Anton

    Theresa May Not.

  • bmudmai

    Forgive me if I am wrong, but if I use a VPN won’t they will struggle to track my activity? And if I were wanting to do anything dodgy such as search how to make a bomb, wouldn’t I look to cover my tracks by using say a VPN?

    • Darter Noster

      Yes, they will struggle, and they know it. These laws will do very little to stop the properly tech savvy professional criminals, but will provide an enormous amount of easily accessible information re Joe Public, which can be used as soon as we’re accused of something as hearsay evidence.

      It’ll mostly be used to prove that an over-paid benefit claimant spent a suspicious amount of time looking at the Thomas Cook website, or that someone accused of ‘hate speech’ had viewed controversial websites, and accessed by local officials investigating minor grievances. It won’t change things for online sex offenders because in those cases your ISP will already hand over your browsing data like greased lightning, if asked to by the police.

  • Jings

    What happens when the snoopers dig the dirt on senior politicians and civil servants, and the enemies of the state hack the data.

  • The Explorer

    “The criminals and the politicians… Ah, but I repeat myself.” Mark Twain.

  • Dreadnaught

    Damned if you do Damned if you don’t.
    This is the wort kind of scaremongering. At last we have a Home Secretary prepared to speak the unspeakable and open up an attack on criminality and terrorism using the same information superhighway that they rely on to further undermine our future way of life and security. The intro to the Bill starts:
    The means available to criminals, terrorists and hostile foreign states to co-ordinate, inspire and to execute their plans are evolving. Communications technologies that cross communications platforms and international borders increasingly allow those who would do us harm the opportunity to evade detection.
    The use of investigatory powers is vital to locate missing people, to place a suspect at the scene of a crime or to identify who was in contact with whom. Powers to intercept communications, acquire communications data and interfere with equipment are essential to tackle child sexual exploitation, to dismantle serious crime cartels, take drugs and guns off our streets and prevent terrorist attacks.

    If conservative stalwarts want to jump on the same platform as Corbyn and the rest of the beards and sandals warriors, because of some perceived potential infringements of their current liberties; well tough titty. No doubt there was a similar back-lash at ‘illiberal’ measures such as conscription and news black-outs and rationing, the last time the security of this country was at stake when and it was the last man standing in Europe post 1939.

    Enough of Madrassas and Muslim Charities being uses as recruitment offices for Islamist proliferation. Enough of mulitcultural cloaks of convenience. No more British blood on British streets. Drastic times make for drastic measures. May has bigger balls than most politicians who also possess the ultimate male status symbol yet are impotent to ‘stand-up’ for Britain.

    It’s time to organise our political priorities and identify the elephant in the room.

  • Demon Teddy Bear

    There’s been talking of logging the sites, but not the pages. Erm … the url is what is logged. You’d have to see the page to extract the site.
    Wouldn’t it be simpler, frankly, to kick out all these immigrants? Rather than have British people live in chains, so that corporations can get cheap labour from dubious sources like Somalia, etc?

  • The Explorer

    It’s a while since I read ‘The God Delusion’. and my memory of it is a bit rusty. As I recall, though, Dawkins says Christianity is relatively harmless. There are even some bishops with whom one can have a sensible conversation. The real danger is Islam. But if you protect religion you protect Islam as well as Christianity; so the way forward is to take them both down.

    That, I think, is the essence of Theresa May’s argument as quoted. Protect the non-violent extremism that leads to intolerance, and you create a climate for violent intolerance to thrive. So all forms of intolerance must go.

    • Politically__Incorrect

      all forms of intolerance must go.”

      … except the intolerance by the state itself

      • Anton

        Well it does have a legal monopoly on violence, so why not on intolerance too…

  • CliveM

    I hate government snooping. I strongly dislike Theresa May and her manipulation of this issue for personal political gain. I don’t want to live in a world where I am assumed to be guilty unless I can prove otherwise.

    But, but, but. We no longer live in normal times. We live in a world that in some ways is more dangerous then it was at the height of the Cold War. Then our opponents where rational, now……….

    I think we know the answer. ISIS and all the other nihilistic, blood cultists are happy to destroy the world, maim and murder, create Armageddon because they believe that is the way to paradise and the return of Allah.

    Today we have to worry about the ‘extremist’ with a butchers knife, or some loser determined to gain paradise through a rucksack fuelled martyrdom. But soon what else? Mass chemical attacks? Biological warfare? Low level civil war? All these things are becoming increasingly possible and if the capability achieved likely. And who would argue that the capability won’t be achieved.

    Yes I wish the mass immigration had never happened, but it did. Yes I wish the Govt would ‘man up’ be honest about the source of the problem and stop the criminalising of views that not so long ago where mainstream. However that wouldn’t change the fact that a real threat exists, that these people use all the modern forms of communication to plan their threats, advise how to carry them out, give instructions how to build bombs, design detonation devices, plan their attacks.

    Perhaps the world has changed so much that I have to live with rules I don’t like, because the alternative is so much worse?

    • The Explorer

      Quite. In WW2 rationing and blackouts might have been unpleasant, but the alternatives were deadly.

      • CliveM

        And, people forget, some restrictions on free speech.

        I dislike what the Govt proposes, I just don’t see what affective alternatives there are. The world is becomming very frightening. However I’m not going to do what some Christians in the NT did and give up on it and wait for the second coming. I have a son and I believe I need to help try and ensure a future for him.

      • Politically__Incorrect

        In WW2 those restrictions would have been temporary. These will be permanent. My concern is that the state and other, possibly criminal elements, will abuse these powers. The term “extremist” is being used to describe anybody who doesn’t follow Cameron’s political orthodoxy. The label could end up as an excuse to intimidate and coerce people into thinking how the state wants. I believe the wartime leaders were just concerned with national security, but the cultural Marxists have quite a different agenda.

        • James60498 .

          Quite right.

          At least one Tory MP has admitted that he could see the EDO being used against anyone who dared question “gay marriage”. And he is quite happy about that.

          • The Explorer

            “Any group that demurs from the values of the state is a cult.” The state says gay marriage is a good thing. Christianity and Islam do not. So Christianity and Islam are both cults. I can live with that (Christianity in its early days, as seen by Rome), provided both are prosecuted equally for the same crime against the state.
            So far, to the best of my knowledge, that has not happened. Hopefully, it now will.

        • The Explorer

          I’m not sure May is a cultural Marxist: at least, not a conscious one.

          When steroids came out they were the new health wonder. Then it was found that they destroyed all bacteria – good as well as bad – and their use was restricted. Sometimes, however, nothing else will do, and the side effects have to be lived with.

          This new bill may be the steroid approach: the malign cannot be destroyed without blasting the benign as well. That is a problem of method, and that I would see as May’s approach.

          But it may be that all religion is seen as malign, just with different degreed of malignancy. That is a problem of wrong diagnosis, to which the wrong treatment is then applied. That is what I see as the problem of cultural Marxism.

          • Ivan M

            It may well be a feature for them. Everyone knows that the first fellows who will be caught by this dragnet will be the Christians. Has any Muslim preacher been arraigned for preaching against homosexuality? Those who followed the law, or think that the Queen is going to protect their liberties are being taken for a ride. The ISIS recruiters will just go under the radar, using word of mouth instead and it will be just as effective. There may well be some high-profile Muslim who will be paraded around, to make the public think that there is equity.

            This is exactly in the form of the method Iman Blair used to screw the drinkers. Lower the age limit for alcohol consumption, profess outrage over teenaged binge drinking, then install all-seeing cameras to keep “us” safe, and for good measure call for early closure of pubs to inconvenience the oldies who now have to go home early.

          • jsampson45

            Read up on steroids.

          • The Explorer

            I’m basing it on experience within my family. Corticosteroids can damage the immune system, which is why they are not given for more than three weeks unless there is no alternative. Or so our GP said. That is why they seemed to me to be a good analogy.

          • jsampson45

            Absolutely! But I thought I ought to give an alert that they do not destroy bacteria. They do have all sorts of nasty side-effects, though, so the analogy holds.

          • The Explorer

            Apologies for giving inaccurate information. Thanks for the correction.

    • big

      CliveM…… I did warn you about this,i think i said ” it’s not how i see you , but how others do” or words to that effect.

    • dannybhoy

      Western European States have brought this increased surveillance of the individual upon themselves.
      Individual liberty will suffer too, and no doubt a form of politically correct police state is on its way.

      • CliveM

        Thing is where we are is not where I would choose to be. But we have to deal with today’s reality.

        It’s very depressing.

      • Dreadnaught

        We have nor brought this on ourselves at all. How the hell do you come to that conclusion? Which kind of Europeans are blowing themselves up on your street?

  • Colin

    I may have clicked on it, but I didn’t read it.

  • James60498 .

    This woman was the one who said that the Tories were seen as the “Nasty Party”.

    Change around the st in nasty, and that’s what she is. (At least that’s how it’s pronounced).

    I have always been in favour of leaving the EU. It was only a case of whether I would campaign as well as vote to leave.

    Until I heard that there was a possibility that she might be leading the campaign. And that led me to thinking, do I really want her to have even more power? My vote is now uncertain.

  • Inspector General

    In a settled society, you don’t rush to a police state, you creep so slowly that it hardly registers as movement. But don’t worry. One is sure that when it comes to it, the fellows who comment on this site, and the contributors, including our esteemed host, are in the main, and excluding a handful reprobates (who know who they are), amongst the finest of the fine. We have nothing to fear.

    Corruption stalks this land. Corruption of the spirit, the soul, the body. There are evil people out there who need to be watched, and gentlemen, it most certainly is not us. One thinks of the criminals who have downloaded pornography of the flesh onto the internet. The criminals who download the pornography of the mind in the name of Islam. The pornography of homosexuality by desperately unhappy militants who want to seize control of society, and for whom their outstanding success known as ‘gay marriage’ is merely the beginning of the end they have planned for us. There are the net criminals who specialise in robbing people on the net. There are criminals who will sell everything and anything on the net, illegal drugs to guns. There are even types whose enjoyment extends to advising the sad and vulnerable on the best way to kill themselves.

    Anyone else disgusted with what human depravation has done to this most marvellous of devices?

    The system needs policing. No doubt about that, and only the finest of the fine can be entrusted with the job. Of being in charge. Step forward most of you…

    • CliveM

      I see you are not going to be cowed by this bill Inspector.

      • Inspector General

        Certainly not, Clive. Anyway, it was inevitable. Anyone who doesn’t think that needs their head examined. We’d best concern ourselves with issues we CAN influence, and there’s plenty of those…

      • carl jacobs

        Imprison the Inspector? Inconceivable! Look what happened the last time someone tried:

        😉

        • Inspector General

          What are you about tonight, colonial rascal?

          • carl jacobs

            Who? Me?

        • CliveM

          Apologies Carl, just can’t get this link to work!!!! Probably an issue my end.

    • Ivan M

      I take it that you now have had your fill of pornography, and now wish to ban it for the rest of us?

  • carl jacobs

    The Secularized West has no idea how to fight a particular religion. It can’t (openly) fight all religion without compromising its self-image. So it seeks to fight a particular class of religion. It parses religious believers into two broad categories – those that accept the presuppositions of post-modern secularism, and those that don’t. The latter classification consists of “extremists.” ‘As you know, “extremists” are bad.

    If you believe that there exists a divine truth that is both knowable and universally authoritative, then you will be classified as an “extremist.” By which they mean “heretic.” You will be suppressed as a threat to the received dogma of unknowable truth. If however you are part of the CoE you will be fine.

  • William Lewis

    A chilling development, Your Grace. Particularly when it comes from one of the main architects of SSM. The way that imposition was steamrollered through our legislature should be an indication of what will soon be coming our way.

    • Inspector General

      One recalls similar fear when Robert Peel set up the modern police force, William. As it turned out, criminal activity shrank, because there now was an agency dealing with it.

      • William Lewis

        The big question is, though Inspector, which side of the law will you and I be?

        • Inspector General

          My dear fellow, it is from families such as ours that police types spring forth. Only the wicked need be in distress over the announcement, and rightly so, what!

          • William Lewis

            You’re a good man in a tight corner, Inspector. Gotta admire your sangfroid.

  • David

    I deplore all this control of course.
    With Remembrance Services about to be held the length and breadth of the land, to honour those who died protecting our freedoms, I feel that the timing of this announcement is particularly crass.
    Surely the more our minds are directed, harassed and controlled the less creative we will all be ?
    Moreover I anticipate that peoples anxiety about being watched will cramp free expression more than the law requires – so many of us will be enlisted to police ourselves to an unnecessary degree.
    Now it is one thing to introduce temporary controls for say, the duration of war. But here, with no end in sight to extremism from one religion, there can be no end in sight to these controls, and so our freedoms are permanently reduced, which is a very serious thing. Isn’t multiculturalism such a gift to our society ? What terrible mistakes our political leadership has made. I have absolutely no faith in any of them. They all lack judgement.

    • dannybhoy

      My point exactly. By regarding all faiths and cultures as of equal worth and bestowing on them the same respect and authority as the faith which shaped our own culture, we have tied ourselves into knots and rendered ourselves impotent.

      • David

        Yes. Cultural and moral relativism is gnawing away at our culture. Any system based on a philosophy of relativism is inherently unstable. But how do we rid ourselves of this cancer before it kills us ? I sense that many thinking, as well as practical, people know that things are awry.

        • dannybhoy

          80+% of our population remain native English, Welsh, Scots and Irish. Get outside of the major cities and conurbations and you realise how ‘British’ rather than ‘multicultural’, our country still is.
          If we wish to remain the stable, safe civilised nation which draws so many here from overseas, we have to reassert our own British laws and values. We have to get rid of this Human Rights legislation which works against our best interests, and neutralises the authority of our elected governments.

          Our government should have the power to deport those convicted of acts of terror or incitement to religious or social hatred. That’s part of their job, to keep our country safe.
          Human Rights is interpreted and implemented by lawyers who have no public accountability, and (apparently) no care for the consequences of their rulings, because all they are doing is applying the law.
          That cannot be right.

          • David

            Totally agree. You’ve put it better than I could have.
            Go to Northern Ireland of most parts of Wales and Scotland, outside the cities, and you’ll see people who are obviously indigenous to these islands or at most, to Europe.

          • dannybhoy

            I don’t know you, do I?!
            :0)

          • David

            Only through the His Grace’s website I assume.

          • dannybhoy

            I don’t find many Christians who share my somewhat robust views. It just seems to me obvious that the only way we can continue to enjoy and express our freedoms is to guard them, and the bigger the threat the greater our resolution must be.

          • David

            I am in same “club” as yourself, having robust political and theological views. It isn’t always comfortable is it ?

            There are few Lay Preachers within any denomination, including my own the C of E, who are through going natural conservatives and longstanding members of Ukip. So I am used to being in a minority of one. I try not to be daunted by this as I know that, in the long term, my views will be justified.
            I am sure that God approves of kindness, but not foolishness and cowardice. When I read the gospels it sometimes strikes me how wise and prescient Jesus was, as he saw into peoples souls. His behaviour is the opposite of foolish naivety. He was very astute politically, whilst being full of kindness for the oppressed.
            In those countries that have direct historical experience of the seriously adverse effects of Islam on the “common good”, and the practice of Christian faith, like Bulgaria for instance, you find that the Church is far more realistic, understanding the need to protect their country’s culture from incursions by the intolerant. But western European countries, and some of their former colonies, like NZ and Oz, that are descended from them, seem blind to the developing strategic world realities. On the other hand the African Churches are very aware of Islam’s intentions.

    • Bernard from Bucks

      Yes David. It’s indeed a ‘Sledgehammer to crack nut-cases’.

  • Inspector General

    Come on men! You’re all behaving like silly schoolgirls this day…

    If you want to continue to walk into town and not get your head cut off, or blown to pieces by a car bomb, this is how it’s going to be. You’re all too soft at the moment. Harden up now, says the Inspector. Be men and be proud of it…

    Well, off you go and harden yourselves….

    • CliveM

      Grrrrrrrrrr

      Is that hard enough?

      • Inspector General

        Bless you, kitten soft…

  • chiefofsinners

    God already stores everyone’s internet browsing data. He videos all our actions, taps every phone call and there is a day when every hidden thought will be revealed. On that day it will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah than for May and Cameron.

    • Inspector General

      Et tu, Chief?

      • chiefofsinners

        My sins and iniquities will be remembered no more, thank God.

    • David

      Yes, God who was, and is and is to come is aware of everything, everybody and their actions. But most of all it is our realisation of our own utter dependence upon him, for everything, that he seeks. Praise be to God !

  • bockerglory

    We should all be reading on-line bibles and declaring on line our faith in Christ! Then the spooks can see we Christians are here to stay and if they read the bible quotes they may get saved. So just like Paul did in Synagogues, let’s involve Christ with every on-line encounter. What a marvellous opportunity to evangelise the prison warders and centurions just as the apostles did!

    Tally ho!

    • David

      Excellent point – biblegateway.com it is then !

  • Martin

    “And not all extremists are violent. But the damage extremists cause to our society is reason enough to act.”

    And thus Theresa May destroys the rule of law. Could we have a worse Home Secretary?

  • dannybhoy

    If you really want to nail your colours to the mast you could sign the petition here…
    http://www.citizengo.org/en/pr/30815-forced-his-job-uk-prison-chaplain-needs-your-support

  • Phil R

    There is no proof ……….that the following is linked to migrants arriving in Madgeburg, Germany.

    Interesting though none the less.

    The question is that would merely mentioning the concerns raised in the short German TV News item, bring you onto the radar of the future Mr/Mrs Anderson?

  • Mike Stallard

    Women do not make good parish priests because they tend, on the whole, to wait for things to come to them rather than going out proactively. And their voices are not right for Cranmer. Women look really silly in a mitre. And women, qua women, tend to choose other women, or safe gay men, to “work” with.
    Gay sex is totally forbidden in the New Testament and Sodom was not entirely about breaking laws on hospitality. David and Jonathan, Naomi and Ruth were not gay or married to each other.
    Jesus’ teachings on divorce are as reliable as the story of his crucifixion and resurrection.
    Paedophilia is certainly not, as John Humphreys never said, as bad as murder. Adultery is not the same as shoplifting.
    Now, Mrs May, have you read that? Please may I go to Whitemoor to learn how to become a Terrorist?