So how’s everyone liking ‘Brexit’?
Well, one of the immediate results of David Cameron‘s consultation with the British people is for an unelected Prime Minister who most people seem to have forgotten is hell-bent on turning Britain into a Mass Surveillance State.
There are few politicians in Westminster who’ve been more obsessed than Theresa May with mass surveillance, the Snooper’s Charter, the curtailing of civil liberties and using the largely manufactured threat of terrorism to try to acquire more and more total control of people’s lives. As I already tried to point out, Theresa May, darling of the GCHQ, seems like the Deep State’s ideal candidate to lead the country.
He gives a taste of what may be to come. ‘What it means is anything from penetrating computer systems by covertly installing malware (viruses, trojans etc) on to them, using keyloggers to monitor every keystroke, tapping into cables, installing malware on smartphones and so on.’
Edward Snowden last year told the BBC that UK intelligence agency GCHQ had the power to hack into phones without their owners’ knowledge. The BBC reported, ‘The agency would be able to see “who you call, what you’ve texted, the things you’ve browsed, the list of your contacts, the places you’ve been, the wireless networks that your phone is associated with. And they can do much more. They can photograph you’.
“GCHQ is to all intents and purposes a subsidiary of the NSA,” said Snowden.
Under the guise of preventing terrorism, there’s good reason to be concerned this campaign will also seek to police real journalism, activism, freedom of expression and freedom of thought. We know that the Conservative’s Home Office (which until weeks ago was under the direct supervision of Theresa May) was to spend £1.8 billion on listening to our private phone calls.
And it is evident that May and the Home Office have been trying to use the immigration crisis to sneak mandatory ID cards into our lives – something liberty groups have been warning us about for some time; this is also the obvious reason for the perceived inconsistency in Theresa May, who post-Brexit has come out with massively anti-immigrant sentiments, but – as some have noted – was in charge of the Home Office and immigration for five years and clearly didn’t do anything to lower immigration. This would be because the immigration ‘crisis’ was being used for other purposes.
She has been among those most advocating that the Human Rights Act be scrapped, which – now that we’ve been taken out of the EU – is much easier for the British government to do.
Theresa May’s attitude towards freedom of information and freedom of journalists is also sketchy at best. She has been in support of ministers being allowed to bypass Freedom of Information requests (which again is much easier to do once Britain is free of EU laws, and also has specific implications for environmental campaigners) and has condoned the detention of journalists under the anti-terrorism act.
Much was made of the nine-hour detention of David Miranda, the partner of The Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald. He ran a series of stories centered on secret NSA documents leaked by Edward Snowden, and was detained under Theresa May’s policies for ‘national security’ purposes – though he had committed no crime. The Guardian reported that former Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg had confronted May over this detention of the journalist under the ‘Terrorism Act’.
Indeed, I’ve argued at length that the Lib Dems were absolutely invaluable when they were in coalition government from 2010 to 2015: because they were blocking so many things that the right-wing section of the Tory Party were trying to push through – including the Snooper’s Charter. Had students and naive ‘protest voters’ not sought to punish Clegg and the Lib Dems so harshly in the 2015 General Election, we would be in a very different situation today. Because the Lib Dems were also blocking the Referendum – and when they were sent into the abyss by voters in 2015, David Cameron was suddenly left entirely vulnerable to the right-wing in his party.
The result of this is Brexit; and will probably also be the end of the Human Rights Act and the coming of the Surveillance State under our new Prime Minister.
“We were prevented from bringing in that legislation into the last government because of the coalition with the Liberal Democrats and we are determined to bring that through,” was virtually one of the first things Theresa May said after the 2015 General Election. With the pesky Lib Dems out of the way, she and GCHQ could renew their push.
The human rights watchdog Privacy International has previously said Therea May emphasising the issue immediately after her party was re-elected to government and the Liberal Democrats were voted out showed that she has an “insatiable appetite” for pushing ahead with expanding the state’s powers of surveillance.
And now she is Prime Minister.
A senior judge at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) had already concluded that the government’s surveillance law breaches fundamental human rights. The court’s decision was in fact poised to stop the highly questionable Investigatory Powers Bill in its tracks.
That probably won’t be an issue anymore.
The fact that May has become Prime Minister so quickly, coinciding with the continuing State of Emergency in France and the probability that increasing false-flag or real terror incidents around Europe may eventually force a Europe-wide ‘state of emergency’ (with emergency powers included), has made me wonder if none of this is coincidence: if the ‘Brexit’ vote itself – far from being an unforeseen event – might actually be part of something more planned. Something in which agencies like the NSA and GCHQ might be playing a significant part.
That’s only a suspicion for now.
Concerning Prime Minister May in more general terms, here is British stand-up comedian and social commentator Frankie Boyle’s take on what May’s leadership is likely to look like.