"Across the globe, these disclosures continue to raise fundamental questions about the lack of effective legal protection against the interception of all our communications. Yet in Britain that conversation is in danger of being lost beneath self-serving spin and scaremongering, with journalists who dare to question the secret state accused of aiding the enemy.
"A balance must of course be struck between security and transparency, but that cannot be achieved while the intelligence services and their political masters seek to avoid any scrutiny of, or debate about, their actions."
"The Guardian's decision to expose the extent to which our privacy is being violated should be applauded and not condemned."
Nick Pickles, director of Big Brother Watch, said the fact GCHQ had doubts about the legality of its surveillance "reinforces the public interest in the disclosures about what has taken place in America and closer to home
"Parliament never legislated to allow the scale of interception that has been exposed, with laws written long before widespread broadband internet access or Facebook existed. There is a clear and overwhelming need for a fundamental review of our legal framework."
"If companies are handing over customer data or access to their equipment when there is no legal authority, then those businesses may well have broken the law. This should be urgently investigated by the information commissioner."
【默克尔电话被美国监听可能已超过10年】相关文章:
★ 学礼仪 迎奥运
最新
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15