Why Have We Only Just Heard About This?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3307741/Rocket-attack-UK-tour-jet.html

/// According to the Sun, British extremists were discussing details of the plot in online 'chatter' picked up by US intelligence officers. ///

Another reason why there should be no opposition to the storing of web-site visits etc.

[Gromit]

We have only just heard about this because it is in no ones interest to tell us. The crew want to keep their jobs, the airline wants to keep flying to Egypt, Egypt still wants tourists and the foreign office want to keep friends with the puppet Government they help to install over the democratically elected on the overthrew.

How is this a reason for storing my web visits? There is nothing in the story about trawling any useful data from surveilling web searches. The two things are totally un-connected.

I don't mind data being saved for 12 monrhs, and authorised people having access to it, but citing this incident a a good reason for saving my web searches is just nonsense.

[anotheoldgit]

Gromit

Perhaps not yours, but others.

/// british extremists were discussing details of the plot in online 'chatter' picked up by US intelligence officers. ///

[Old_Geezer]

You get to know on a 'need to know' basis until it makes no difference who knows.

It has bee all to do with monitoring decent citizens although some like to make such excuses in order to gradually drag folk into a totalitarian risk society. Genuine and successful terrorists aren't just going to leave information that helps prior to an incident. Tighten things up and all that happens is such terrorist chatter disappears. And we, the decent folk of society, lose if the terrorists give the authorities sufficient invalid excuses to have us all watched as if we had no right to privacy.

[Gromit]

Not wishing to be pedantic, but 'online chatter' suggests a conversation such as Skype and WhatsApp or Facetime and iMessage. None of which is covered by this bill. If the security services have come to a conclusion based on the terrorists computer history, it is not from accessing their IE or Firefox search history. Using this tragedy to justify eroding every British person privacy is snidey opportunism. And we should resist it.

[anotheoldgit]

Gromit

I am not an IT specialist but I thought that they could see what web pages had been visited just by accessing their IE or Firefox search history?

[ichkeria]

If the "online chatter" is abroad it does not come under UK legislation
I would be gravely sceptical of such leads, as no doubt the security services also are.
I read a bizarre report in the paper claiming that activists would have boasted about an attack retrospectively, thus "proving" that they had done it. Which makes no sense whatever. More likely it's a combination of different things that are making the likelihood of it being foul play more than just a suspicion or speculation
If you look at Kremlin sponsored English language websites you can see how absolutely livid the Russians are with Britain about this. That is the really bizarre thing

[Gromit]

The desert sky is very very dark at 4:13 am and an aeroplane blowing up will be noticed by people below it. Of course IS in the Sinai Pinnisula are going to phone each other and 'chatter' about it as soon as it occurred.