It's a bit rich of the New York Times to bleat about us having ''little criticism on privacy issues'' when the UK had to complain to the US Government about NYT publishing leaked police photos of the Manchester bomb, potentially compromising a serious criminal investigation.

You mean compromising the Conservatives fear mongering rhetoric of course

- yet even they think the UK's intrusion into private life is both excessive - and ineffective,

and clearly believe the public have a right to know - as do I.

- even without whatever new levels of intrusion and spying on all UK citizens May Rudd and Fallon are hinting at.

So both the NYT and the EU think that keeping your own citizens in the dark is a bad thing.

May, Rudd and Fallon of course think its essential.

I agree with the NYT on this.

You mean compromising the Conservatives fear mongering rhetoric of course

All the major UK parties, the UK police, UK security services and UK media organisations all complained about it, not only the Conservatives - they were just the messenger. Try looking at things with a little more objectivity and a little less conspiratorial paranoia.

All the major UK parties, the UK police, UK security services and UK media organisations all complained about it, not only the Conservatives - they were just the messenger. Try looking at things with a little more objectivity and a little less conspiratorial paranoia.

LOL now that IS rich coming from you.

BUT

Yes, they did quite rightly in some ways complain that the US administration leaked stuff classified as 'secret'

Y'know Trump - the USA - those people some fools think are going to come running to do trade deals that benefit Britain after Brexit rather than take advantage and do us over with a TTP 'arrangement' ....

You do realise that the leak came from Trumps US administration dont you?

... and that it was the NYT who were simply THE MESSENGER, and showed there was really nothing they reported that should have been kept hidden?

It started to show that the fear mongering rhetoric about sophisticated bomb, and organised networks of terror originating from the Conservative leadership were Bovine Dung

- for some purpose of their own (more snooping and reduction of rights no doubt )

Now why did the UK government bull all that up to their own citizens?

Rather than spreading truth and calm and quickly assuaging the fears of the populace?

I wonder if that fear mongering rhetoric would have continued if the TRUTH hadn't been leaked?

You should be thanking the NYT.

You do make me laugh.

A little more from the NYT

How Terrorism Can Alter Elections

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/22/world/europe/how-terrorism-can-alter-elections.html?rref=collection%2Fcolumn%2Fthe-interpreter

"By creating a fear of future attacks, terrorism affects even those who do not experience the violence firsthand. That fear leads people to give security a higher priority, to seek authority figures who will impose order and to re-evaluate who in society might pose a threat."

What I still want to know is

If most, if not all of these attackers are 'known' to the security services, who the heck are these security services watching using there unchallenged access to everyone's private conversations, if (clearly) not these?

Particularly as May says the anti-terrorism budget is protected.

Realistically, electronic communication can very rarely be intercepted without inside (the group to be spied on) information if someone doesn't want their communications to be intercepted.

Intercept/back door twitter - 3 others will pop up to replace twitter overnight or simply use another similar app

Look at the people and the reports of them released so far:

They communicate and radicalise face to face - even preaching hate in playgrounds to children, just like Choudary did.

What worth spying on all your citizens emails and phone calls?

What about the 900 jihadists potentially returning to the UK - do you think they are emailing or twittering themselves in?

It needs community policing, not spooks spying unchallenged on 500 million emails txts and phone calls of 50 million innocent UK citizens every day.

There is a lot to be said about listening to gut information from the people and communities. In fact I would say it's crucial information. If something you feel is not right it probably is not right. It's better to err on the side of caution than to ignore.

I was listening to the T-pims measures which can be used. More here about that here

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3711679/Just-ONE-terror-suspect-UK-official-curfew-despite-2-000-fanatics-large-Britain.html

Worth a read as you will see Labour introduced control orders which then progressed to T-pims.

There is a lot to be said about listening to gut information from the people and communities. In fact I would say it's crucial information. If something you feel is not right it probably is not right. It's better to err on the side of caution than to ignore.

 

I was listening to the T-pims measures which can be used. More here about that here

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3711679/Just-ONE-terror-suspect-UK-official-curfew-despite-2-000-fanatics-large-Britain.html

 

Worth a read as you will see Labour introduced control orders which then progressed to T-pims.

Compared to Mays latest outburst

"

"I’ll rip up human rights laws that impede new terror legislation"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/06/theresa-may-rip-up-human-rights-laws-impede-new-terror-legislation

So - not that help terrorists or impede prosecution, just that impede her terror legislation - which doesn't seem to work against terrorists anyway.

May must be getting advice from Kim Jong Haircut.

and back to the NYT

London Attackers Slipped By Despite an Avalanche of Warnings (to security services)

"What has become clear since the Saturday night assault is that again and again, the young men who killed seven people before they were shot to death by the police had been reported to law enforcement authorities, bumping into what should have been the country’s security net, only for those signals to be played down, ignored or missed."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/06/world/europe/london-assailants-terrorism-warning-signs-fbi.html?emc=edit_mbe_20170607&nl=morning-briefing-europe&nlid=80833938&te=1

"Mr. Butt’s brother, Saad, who did paid work for the police on counterextremism issues and was estranged from the assailant, missed signs of how dangerous his brother’s extremism had become."

"In 2015, an F.B.I. informant, Jesse Morton, wrote a report to his handler in the United States, identifying Mr. Butt as a person to watch because of what Mr. Morton described as his rising role in extremist chat rooms run by Al Muhajiroun, an organization banned in Britain because of its sprawling links to terrorism."

and adding some Fake News

Security services said 'His twitter account is fine, and the the phone registered to him has only been used to txt his mum. Why would we think he was a terrorist?'

and adding some Fake News

Security services said 'His twitter account is fine, and the the phone registered to him has only been used to txt his mum. Why would we think he was a terrorist?'

This was later confirmed by a source who wishes to remain anonymous.

He said:

'Yes we spend lots of time reading emails and txt's to people labled as 'mum', great reading,

but nowhere near as much time as we spend reading text and emails between couples - Oh yeahhh ...

Errr ... You aren't going to print my name are you?

Wanstead nursery stabbing: Female worker 'stabbed by three women shouting 'Allah''

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/wanstead-nursery-stabbing-woman-stabbed-three-women-shouting-allah-134735834.html?hl=1&noRedirect=1

Other jihadi attacks since and not reported on mainstream news on TV? Is it to make us feel safer than we are and stop people taking retaliation into their own hands or to stop the jihadis having a TV platform.

Other jihadi attacks since and not reported on mainstream news on TV? Is it to make us feel safer than we are and stop people taking retaliation into their own hands or to stop the jihadis having a TV platform.

Also it would seem that the leader

Who's spook employed brother knew nothing,

and who clearly should have been on the spooks email watching, telephone listening, credit card watching radar for a number of reasons

tried to hire a lorry via card - but had the payment refused, before he hired the van with a card.

Just who the f'lip are the spooks using the snoopers charter to snoop on?

Another attack in London

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/parsons-green-explosion-sparks-panic-london-tube-station-rush-hour-075222257.html