Would calling someone from a payphone (coin) box still baffle the intelligence gathering departments like in The Sopranos for instance ?

Just asking...

Hugo Rifkind's piece in today's Times is good, if you have access.

But it's just another step on an increasingly slippery slope, isn't it? If we all just accept that the world's governments can monitor who we're contacting, when we contact them and for how long, we're then only one step away from routine monitoring of the content of our communications as well.

You're possibly right, I see it more as merely adjusting the surveillance as we've adjusted our means of communications though. But that next step is the vital one, and shouldn't be undertaken without (relatively) open debate. That again comes to the crux of it for me, we don't know what they can do and what they can't do and we don't know who is supposed to be monitoring and policing them. As DaveO wrote, its the lack of accountability that is the major issue in my opinion.

Yep, along with the vilification of immigrants and Islam from certain groups and media outlets. As you say, the same kind of people who vehemently oppose, or say they do, the secret power of the state as evidenced by the Stasi etc. The same kind of people who will be strongly in favour of the death penalty. The same kind of people who would demand monitoring of people who look at any kind of pornography or anything "obscene" in case they might be paedophiles.
Ironically they're generally the first to defend Britain as a bastion of freedom and tolerance, yet that British culture is being destroyed by allowing the freedom of foreigners to enter the country and the tolerance to allow them to practise their own religion or culture.
Hypocritical idiots, I generally call them. Or Daily Mail readers for short.

Perhaps I'm just inherently less trusting than you are. Your other point is sound, though: if what they're doing is necessary and proportionate, why the secrecy? And if they're being secretive about this, what else don't we know?

I don't think it is in that in the old physical world the only communications monitored would be those of people suspected of being involved in some criminal or terrorist activity.

Even information such as where innocent people go on the Internet and who they contact via email coming out could have serious implications for the individual in their personal and working lives. Provided it isn't illegal it's no ones business where people go or who they talk to.

So for me the blanket capturing of information even if the content isn't read is still going too far. You should always need probable cause to track anything about anyone.

Then you need to add suitable checks and balances on top of only acting with probable cause to make sure that isn't abused.

Well its certainly stirred a few things up: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/12/anger-mounts-congress-telephone-surveillance-programmes Particularly interesting the EU has got involved whereas our own government doesn't think there is an issue.

Well its certainly stirred a few things up: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/12/anger-mounts-congress-telephone-surveillance-programmes Particularly interesting the EU has got involved whereas our own government doesn't think there is an issue.

DaveO wrote:Well its certainly stirred a few things up: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/12/anger-mounts-congress-telephone-surveillance-programmes Particularly interesting the EU has got involved whereas our own government doesn't think there is an issue. I like the bit where it says that the private contractor, "Booz Allen issued a statement on Tuesday saying that [Edward] Snowden had been fired for "violations of the firm's code of ethics"." Who says Americans don't do irony.

DaveO wrote:Well its certainly stirred a few things up: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/12/anger-mounts-congress-telephone-surveillance-programmes Particularly interesting the EU has got involved whereas our own government doesn't think there is an issue. I like the bit where it says that the private contractor, "Booz Allen issued a statement on Tuesday saying that [Edward] Snowden had been fired for "violations of the firm's code of ethics"." Who says Americans don't do irony.

There's also the financial implications surrounding the storage of e-traffic. Government has said that it is the responsibility of the service provider to store this information, the service providers reckon it will be at a huge cost. Guess who will be paying.