I wonder who's watching me now....?

"I'm just an average man with an average life
I work from nine to five, hey hell I pay the price
All I want is to be left alone in my average home
But why do I always feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone


I always feel like somebody's watchin' me
And I have no privacy
I always feel like somebody's watchin' me
Tell me, is it just a dream?"
         Rockwell.. and the late Michael Jackson.

Hear it again here....
                 ............or do I mean here?



"And I don't feel safe anymore, oh what a mess
I wonder who's watching me now?
Who?"
The FRA?

Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party -  Putting privacy first.

Swedish bloggers look to Telia to stand up for their rights

I don't usually blog in Swedish - not because I can't - but because I want the world to read about what is being done here in defending our rights.  Right now though - all across Sweden bloggers are putting up this.. or words like it. (translated below).  Read it please...  and if you want to stand up for your rights and ours, blog it and spread it further. Join us too on Facebook..

Upprop: Telia – ta FRA-lagen till domstol

Från och med den första december 2009 är Sverige en övervakad nation. Det är då som FRA får tillgång till en stor del av vår Internet- och mobiltrafik.


Detta kommer att få ett antal konsekvenser. De mest påtagliga är att flera grundläggande rättigheter i praktiken kommer att sättas ur spel. En självklarhet som brevhemligheten kommer efter den första december 2009 inte att existera på Internet. Även andra grundlagsskyddade rättigheter som källskyddet är starkt hotat. Många organisationer har skarpt protesterat mot FRA-lagen, bland andra Journalistförbundet och Advokatsamfundet. En majoritet av svenska folket är emot FRAs avlyssning.


Flera juridiska experter uttrycker dessutom stor tveksamhet till om FRA-lagen är förenlig med Europakonventionen, dvs. den europeiska konventionen angående skydd för de mänskliga rättigheterna. Sverige har förbundit sig att följa den konventionen och rimligtvis bör lagen alltså prövas i Europeiska domstolen för de mänskliga rättigheterna. Telia ansvarar idag för en majoritet av den trafik som FRA kommer att vilja avlyssna. Därför uppmanar vi Telia: ta FRA-lagen till domstol.


Telia har nu en chans att vinna goodwill genom att stå upp för demokratin

Appeal: Telia – take the FRA-law to court!


"From the first of December 2009 Sweden is a nation under surveillance. It is then that the FRA has access to a large part of our Internet and mobile services.

This is going to have a number of consequences. The most notable is that several fundamental rights will  in practice be eliminated. Obviously confidentiality of correspondence does not exist on the Internet after the first december 2009. Other constitutional rights such as protection of (journalistic) sources are highly threatened. Many organizations have strongly protested against the FRA law, including Journalists and the (Swedish) Bar Association. A majority of Swedish people are against FRA's interception.

Several legal experts also express considerable doubt whether the FRA law is compatible with the ECHR, ie. the European Convention on Human Rights. Sweden has undertaken to comply with the Convention, and the law ought therefore to be tested in the European Court of Human Rights. Telia is currently responsible for a majority of the traffic that FRA will want to listen to. We therefore call on Telia: take the FRA law to court.

Telia now has a chance to win goodwill by standing up for democracy."

This is an open and common blog entries - copy, enhance and publish to your blog....
 
Sweden's FRA are monitoring all traffic passing Sweden's borders and monitoring in particular international transit traffic.  Lift this and copy it.... 
 

Bloggers making the call include....
Tantrikbloggen, Annarkia, Scaber Nestor, Sossar mot Storebror, Den Nya Medborgarrättsrörelsen, Archangel, Darkangel och Mumma, Signerat Kjellberg, Den digitala parkbänken, Sagor från livbåten, Piratpartisten, Thorlin, Sandrability, Bloggvärldsbloggen, Aspiebloggen, Farmorgun, Pesptraktelser, Humblebee.net, JensO, Beelzebjörn, Röd Libertarian, Calandrella, ProjO, Christian Engström, Webhackande, Liberal & Långsint, Osmidigt, Solid Block of Ise, Johan Ronström, Personlig Utveckling?, Bandhunden Skäller, Infallsvinkel, Hearts of Joy, Primarys Blog, Alliansupproret, Integritet & frihet, Tieowbeijas, The Pheleroxian Blog, Mattias Bjärnemalm, Skivad Lime, OlofB, OlofB, OlofB, Enligt min Humla, Daniel och de små tomtarna, hannes2peer, Beelzebjörn, Exiled Pirate,  Henrik Alexandersson, Den Digitala Parkbänken
(this list mostly lifted from Tantrikbloggen..)

Piratpartiet & The Pirate Party -  Putting privacy first.


Translated by Google.. with a little help from me...



,

Have a Big Brother Christmas...

Today's the day...  It's finally happening.....   

Today is the day that FRA get connected in to cables carrying ALL Swedens cross border e-traffic and the Swedish state gets to monitor anything they fancy from traffic passing through the kingdom (though the king I don't think gets much say in things).  Since bits aren't all that fussy which route they take that's just as much an issue for the rest of humanity as it is for the few million herring eaters out here on the continental fringe - in fact they are intending to primarily focus on monitoring international traffic not sourced from Sweden.

So...  Happy Christmas..  Big Brother Sweden is giving all of us a big slice of state surveillance to chew on.  Pour another glass of glögg and...  Skål!

Still Big Brother does have a sense of humour....   check out this at Techbelly...
Merry fucking Xmas, Love Big Brother

Piratpartiet & The Pirate Party -  Putting privacy first.

Tips on living under Surveillance: Stockholm Edition....

I've blogged about it before but just today I thought Swedish readers might find themselves in need of advice on how to communicate securely in repressive environments. 

Actually.. it's not just - or not even Sweden - that is under surveillance now that parliament here has for the second time given the thumbs up for the FRA to tap all traffic passing Swedish borders.  It's enough to piss you off....  Whatever happened to principles?

Piratpartiet & The Pirate Party -  Defending your privacy

Secret Affair: This is the time for action (FRA edition)

"This is the time for action, this is the time to be seen"

Sadly I missed the demonstrations on Saturday against the FRA legislation - up for review in the Swedish parliament on Wednesday.  This legislation - which is in force since the first of January this year - allows state monitoring of ALL traffic passing Swedens international borders (mail, telephony, SMS, surfing etc, etc).  There are specific provisions to limit surveillance on traffic originating in Sweden - but all other traffic is fair game.... 

Which means if you don't live in Sweden THIS AFFECTS YOU!  Your right to privacy?  Those nice guys in Riksdagen are about to screw you over....

If that concerns you then write to them and tell them.  Lobby them to respect your privacy and vote against this legislation.

Write today...    write now........  do it.

Contact details here.  Supporting the bill and in need of your persuasion are Moderaterna (m), Kristdemokraterna (kd), Folkpartiet (f) and Centerpartiet (c)... click through for lists of names and mail contact details..


Piratpartiet & The Pirate Party -  Putting Privacy first.

FRA, 138, Drowning dogs and heavy British Boots...

It's an interesting week in parliament this week... at least for those with an eye for justice and individual rights and privacy. 

In Sweden the FRA legislation (that means state monitoring of all international traffic (voice, mail, sms, email etc) passing Swedens borders is up for review.  It's already on the statute book.. but all it needs is four MPs from the ruling alliance to vote against, or eight to abstain and the law will be torn up.  The stakes are high...  not least as it will be a hot topic for next year's parliamentary elections if the opposition don't succeed in getting it stopped.

Meanwhile, over at the EU discussions on the Telecom Package and the famous amendment 138 come to a head tomorrow with another meeting between ministers and the parliamentary representatives (Piratpartiets MEP Christian Engström among them).  Much to the disgust of the Green group the parliamentary delegation have already agreed not to press ministers on other areas like net neutrality, but still they still want to see the parliaments proposals implemneted - making judicial review a necessary condition for disconnecting people from the Internet.  'Innocent until proven guilty' doesn't sound like such a controversial position now does it?

I've been impressed by the degree of communication both of the issues and the process and progress in the Swedish blogosphere - not least from pirates HAX, Christian and Rick.  Communication even when the Council of Minister's hide their negotiating position behind a 'Confidential' stamp.

Latest from HAX is a report on how the British have been lobbying Eva-Britt Svensson - a left wing MEP - to support their position on cutting people off from the internet without trial. Apparently, according to the Brits it's all a question of child pornography.  Eva-Britt, feminist, and chairman of the equality working party, doesn't agree....

"..it's instead the possibility for powerful capitalist interests within principally the entertainment industry to drive enforcement work, and through Internet suppliers stop those that are copying music and games on the web through e.g The Pirate Bay and similar search engines.  It's all about putting a stop to consumption of culture by those that can't or don't believe they can afford the prices that the industry decides."

If I can steal a quote...  
"When you want to drown a dog you say it has rabies."
                                                          Jean-Pierre Brard (Parti Communiste Français) 
...from the French parliamentary debate on 'HADOPI 2' when the French justice minister started to talk about child pornography.

Update:  the vote on FRA is in fact next week, weds Oct 14th.

In search of the Pied Piper

In  two curious articles Dagens Nyheter has been trying to dish the dirt on who is behind the opposition in the blogosphere to Swedens new FRA law.  That's the one that says the state can monitor all cross border communications all the time.

It is in a sense a good question -  political 'rent a mobs' have been a part of politics since roman times.  But is it relevant here?  People on all sides of the political spectrum have spoken out against this law and it's implications for personal privacy.  It would come as no surprise to find that those that object to it include people with intellect, initiative and resources - and that some of those are prepared to actively oppose it.  And yes, some of the people that think it's wrong might have spoken with one another and said "What the f*** are we going to do about this crock of s***."

Does that make a storm in the blogosphere into a conspiracy?  I think not. If PR companies could readily manipulate what a stream of individuals choose to write about then I'm sure the relevant question would be 'How much money and resources did the government lay down to generate a favourable tide of opinion to support this?'.  

Though perhaps that is still a relevant question - just how much has the goverment spent to try and 'form' public opinion on this question.  And just as pointedly - how much has the FRA spent to promote the introduction of this law.  What is their mandate to try and form public opinion after their own interests (It is not after all for them to decide what is in the best interests of either the state or the population).

And for that matter... the one group we know is being paid to write about this are journalists - own up guys.  What's your agenda?

Found: In Pandora's box

I just found this in Rick Falkvinge's blog... a report from the EU on basic rights on the Internet that seems to be fundamentally critical of much that is happening in Europe today to legislate and encroach on personal integrity and privacy rights on the net. Seems almost to good to be true...

And just this time Rick has it in English....

Go Read!

On Liberty

"When a People once permits Government to violate the genuine Principles of Liberty, Encroachment will be grafted upon Encroachment; Evil will grow upon Evil; Violation will follow Violation, and Power will engender Power, till the Liberties of ALL will be held at despotic command"

London Correspondence Society, 1798

Virtual rights

There is lots happening to regulate use of the internet - and allow unwarranted surveillance of individual use of the medium. Rick Falkvinge has written an excellent piece that highlights the fundamental point that use of the Internet should have the same rights and protection as conventional media. Something that seems to completely have passed regulators by...

..but as it's written in Swedish I'll put my translation of it here:

"People talk of a the Internet being a lawless land with Internet advocates wanting different rules to those that normally apply "In Real Life".. but they are missing an important point - we want the complete opposite. We want the same rules on the net as apply outside the net.

Since the 1960s it's been possible to copy for example a poem or drawing and send it to someone through the post. It is absolutely forbidden for anyone to open a letter to see if it contains a photocopy of something, notwithstanding copyright. The integrity of the post is sacrisanct.
We demand that the same rules apply on the net as off it.

Since the 1700s it has been possible to send letters anonymously and act anonymously to drive social or political questions, send tips to reporters etc.
We demand that the same rules apply on the net as off it.

Since the 1850s it's been possible to get access to all current culture and knowledge without limits, even without paying for your own copy, by using a library.
We demand that the same rules apply on the net as off it.

It is completely tabu for the state or others to register who sends letters to each other or to monitor who reads what at the library.
We demand that the same rules apply on the net as off it.

Since roman times there has been full immunity for the bearer of messages. That's to say that the bearer has no form of responsibility for the content of communication carried between two other parties.
We demand that the same rules apply on the net as off it.

Ever since there have been post and telephone companies it has been absolutely tabu to try and restrict communication to or from specific adresses or telephone numbers based on any moral other viewpoint.
We demand that the same rules apply on the net as off it.

The lawmakers don't seem to understand that civil rights apply even to communication that citizens conduct on the Internet. That lack of understanding sets the whole concept of civil rights at risk."

Disclaimer

Your download of information from this site may be intercepted and monitored by the Swedish State. Check here for further information on this infringement of your right to privacy

News travels...

I read a blog item on Henrik Alexandersson's blog on the shifting boundaries of legislation in the surveillance state... with a link to a Swedish article about the latest proposals in the UK to give councils and other agencies access to stored information on your calls and internet access.

But that article was a citing an article at Times Online about the governments proposals for implementing the EU directive covering monitoring of telecoms usage. The comments to the article were full as you might expect with criticism of the heavy hand of Big Brother. ..but one in particular caught my eye...

"It clearly infringes on everyone's right to privacy. What will those control freaks devise next - a scheme by which everyone's mail will be opened and logged, or will they just demand that the populace is microchipped and fitted with tracking devices "to prevent crime"?

Paul C. Dickie, Stockport, UK"

Welcome to Sweden!

An inconvenient truth?

It is repeatedly used as an argument by those defending the FRA legislation that the FRA are only going to look at a small bit of the traffic - the bit that has to do with nasty evil terrorists... ignoring the fact that you can't find the bits you're interested in without looking through the rest.
(A good critique of the governments position as put in a letter to the Moderaterna membership is here... in Swedish)

It's hard to believe that they can't understand that looking through all international traffic constitues mass-surveillance - so you're left with the conclusion that they choose not to see it that way. A complicit deception.

In the comments to the post linked above I found this quote which I thought summed it all up rather well...

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Joseph Goebbels.

What was that about the FRA-law being needed to protect against external threats to the state?

As a last resort?

The FRA are reading your mail. Use bottle post!

Clean flour in the bag… A Miller’s tale?

A phrase you see a lot in the debate here on state surveillance is ‘jag har rent mjöl i påsen’. I have clean flour in my bag… so please go ahead and keep watch on everything I say. It’s a phrase and an argument that makes me want to scream NOooooooo!!!! every time I hear it.

The corollary to the argument is ‘If you’re against this law, what have you got to hide?’. It’s an argument I find extremely offensive. Privacy is a recognized right. I don’t need to defend why I want privacy, it is for those wanting to remove that right to demonstrate that that is justified.

What I find most offensive with this argument is the arrogant and selfish supposition that says that because surveillance is acceptable to me in my life as it is here and now today it must be acceptable to all other people regardless of their views and circumstances. Together with this is the equally offensive nationalist assumption that if we can protect the communication and rights of swedish people then it doesn’t matter what we do to others.

One of the misconceptions that often underpins this blind faith in the system is that surveillance is looking for people committing crimes. It isn’t. The FRA is looking out for external threats to Sweden - which mostly has nothing to do with illegal activity. Agitating against government legislation for instance is quite legal but (certainly in some other parts of the world) could see you classed as an enemy of the state. So if you’ve not done anything wrong and it’s not illegal why are you being monitored? And why are they monitoring you if they are not going to actively use that information?

The other thing that people don’t seem to understand is that it’s not you that decides what ‘clean’ means. Is your life organic wholemeal, or plain bleached white? Are you gluten free??? Which one fits (or more to the point doesn’t fit) the political agenda of the day???

And remember, in an environment where Sweden is trading or selling intelligence to other powers, it’s not Sweden’s nice likeable trustworthy politicians that are deciding what clean is either…

Feeling threatened?

The FRA want (and at the moment will get) new powers to carry out surveillance on all cable traffic crossing Swedens borders - so we may wonder what is the threat that needs these new powers?

Changes in the law will mean that the scope of FRA activity changes from "external military threats" to just "external threats".. a not insignificant change. So what is Sweden afraid of? (bearing in mind that 'national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country' are the only possible justifications to support a massive violation of the right to privacy given by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.)

Terrorism!?
Sweden is clearly a high profile target for terrorists.
err. NOT!

Sweden is placed 97 out of 160 on a global terrorism index. Since the infamous 9/11 attack there has been precisely noll fatalities in Sweden from terrorism (casualties in the Bali bombing excluded).
And.. which you might have missed.. terrorism globally is on the decline.
Don't take my word for it - read this well researched report by the Human Security Brief - an organisation part funded by the Swedish government.
So the Swedish government are legislating for increased powers at a time when the real threat is declining... Does that make sense?

Military threat?
What real military threat exists then that threaten the security of the Swedish state?
Sweden has troops deployed on peace keeping duties in Afghanistan for instance - but troops in foreign places aren't the Swedish state and it's hard to see that any attack on troops in Afghanistan could constitute a threat to Sweden - sad as it would be for soldiers relatives if somone died.
What might you consider a proportional threat to justify surveillance of the communications of everyone in the country? If it's not a threat of war or invasion for me it doesn't make the grade... But come on guys - there hasn't been an invading foreign army in Sweden for two hundred years! (...unless you count that unfortunate incident in 1940). Are you really worried about that?

Yes, we know (because Ingvar told us, the scalliwag) that the FRA has helped keep the peace when you've had a tiff while playing chicken with the russians... but that was radio signal monitoring.. and your cable surveillance really isn't going to help there is it?

So, if terrorism is declining, and the real threat to national security isn't at a level to justify mass surveillance. What is left? Can it be a coincidence that you want to broaden your outlook a bit? Political and economic threats... think of all the analysts you can employ stirring that pot....

A million times "no!"

You are of course familiar with the UNs Universal Declaration of Human Rights.. but just as a quick reminder, amongst other things it says…

…Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world….

Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

and...
Article 30.
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

The proposed “FRA law” in Sweden will mean all traffic in cables crossing the border will be copied and then monitored electronically. Traffic matching specific filter parameters will be inspected by FRA staff. Copying and electronically monitoring all traffic are both surely arbitrary interferences in privacy and correspondence?

In Sweden monitoring of an individuals communications is permissible only following a court decision proving evidence of criminal activity. Ingvar Åkesson, FRA’s director, in a reply to a newspaper article by a member of parliament suggests that automatically monitoring all my traffic without first proving the need before a court is OK, because they are not involved in looking for criminal activity (it is only surveillance) and they are going to do it to everyone - and anyway Swedes don't need to worry because they're mainly interested in looking at foreigners.

I’m sorry, but infringing my right to privacy without grounds is not acceptable.. and doing it simultaneously to millions of others does not make it more acceptable. Nor does the fact that you don’t catch anything in your filters worth investigating make it acceptable to monitor me just on the off-chance. That you choose to do this to foreigners over whom you have no legal jurisdiction cannot make it better - that's the kind of thinking that leads to Guantanamo...

Bearing in mind that this law will affect millions of people that don’t live in Sweden and are not Swedish I would just like to stress that last part.

“Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.”

Ingvar Åkesson.. that includes you!