Feeds

May threatens ban on 'hate-inciting' radicals, even if they don't promote violence

Right, so you'll be wanting even more power then?

Maximizing your infrastructure through virtualization

Radical groups should be banned to prevent them inspiring others to violence, even if they're not promoting violence themselves, according to Home Secretary Theresa May.

Currently the UK Home Secretary can ban any group overtly promoting violent rebellion, and has successfully done so in the past. A new task force led by the prime minister will consider extending that power to cover organisations "inciting hatred and division" just in case armchair extremists decide to take the next logical step.

The problem is that while violence is relatively easy to define, any extension to the Home Secretary's existing powers is going to face serious interpretive issues. Working out what constitutes "hatred and division" is going to be hazardous at best, but last week's events have lent considerable weight to those politicians of a more authoritarian bent.

Speaking on the BBC Theresa May confirmed that 5,500 postings calling for violent jihad had already been scrubbed from the internet by police, but – according to May – this isn't enough, as messages promoting hatred without actively inciting violence remain uncensored.

Certainly Ofcom has a hard time keeping broadcast TV channels clear of hatred-promoting material, regularly censuring channels which broadcast a call to arms. It appears that smaller channels broadcasting in minority languages feel safe in the apparent belief that if it's not in English, the regulator won't notice.

The comments came alongside the attempted revival of the Snoopers' Charter, which would require ISPs to log users' emails and web traffic just as mobile phone networks currently log calls, messages and the location of their customers.

Advocates of both measures will be hoping last week's horrific murder of an off-duty British soldier in Woolwich will have hardened public opinion.

Nobody is claiming that any of these snooping measures would have prevented those events, but it's too good an opportunity to miss for those wishing to push legislation through. ®

Top three mobile application threats

More from The Register

next story
Arrr: Freetard-bothering Digital Economy Act tied up, thrown in the hold
Ministry of Fun confirms: Yes, we're busy doing nothing
Help yourself to anyone's photos FOR FREE, suggests UK.gov
Copyright law reforms will keep m'learned friends busy
Apple smacked with privacy sueball over Location Services
Class action launched on behalf of 100 million iPhone owners
US judge: YES, cops or feds so can slurp an ENTIRE Gmail account
Crooks don't have folders labelled 'drug records', opines NY beak
ONE EMAIL costs mining company $300 MEEELION
Environmental activist walks free after hoax sent share price over a cliff
UK government officially adopts Open Document Format
Microsoft insurgency fails, earns snarky remark from UK digital services head
You! Pirate! Stop pirating, or we shall admonish you politely. Repeatedly, if necessary
And we shall go about telling people you smell. No, not really
prev story

Whitepapers

Designing a Defense for Mobile Applications
Learn about the various considerations for defending mobile applications - from the application architecture itself to the myriad testing technologies.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Top 8 considerations to enable and simplify mobility
In this whitepaper learn how to successfully add mobile capabilities simply and cost effectively.
Seven Steps to Software Security
Seven practical steps you can begin to take today to secure your applications and prevent the damages a successful cyber-attack can cause.
Boost IT visibility and business value
How building a great service catalog relieves pressure points and demonstrates the value of IT service management.