Britain, Government, Internet, Society

UK Justice Secretary says online trolling could be a criminal offence

INTERNET TROLLING

Online trolling could soon be made a criminal offence in the UK

ONLINE TROLLING could be made a criminal offence, the UK Justice Secretary has said.

David Gauke suggested he was prepared to act after Katie Price launched a campaign and petition for tougher penalties for web abuse.

The TV personality’s son Harvey, 15 – who is partially blind, autistic and has a range of other health problems – suffers constant abuse on social media, but last year a 19-year-old who targeted him on Twitter only received a police caution. Miss Price then set up a campaign demanding a new criminal offence to make online trolling a specific crime. Thus far, it has received 220,000 signatures – and led to an appearance in front of the Commons petitions committee.

Miss Price told the committee that a line should be drawn between ‘banter’ and criminal abuse – and said the law had failed to keep up with the changing use of technology.

Asked about the concerns Miss Price had, Mr Gauke acknowledged that we often see some appalling behaviour on social media.

The intervention comes just days after Theresa May warned social media giants they were undermining British democracy by allowing ‘intimidation and aggression’ to run riot online.

Firms such as Facebook and Twitter will face an official assessment of whether they are cracking down on abuse. There will also be an annual transparency report to expose the worst companies which fail to tackle the scourge of web hatred.

Officials will publish data on the scale of harmful content reported to different internet firms, how much is removed and how quickly.

Speaking to MPs, Miss Price said police were powerless to act in many cases of online abuse. She also said she wanted to see the creation of a register of offenders.

Speaking about her son’s case, Miss Price said: ‘Even the police were really embarrassed because it got to the point where they couldn’t take it any further because they couldn’t charge them with anything because there is nothing in place… since then it has just continued.

‘If it was a criminal offence I do not believe there would be so much of it . . . it would stop so many deaths, harassment and abuse. Some of you MPs have even had it as well. It happens to everyone – so it’s a no-brainer really.’

Standard
Books, Britain, Government, History, Military, Russia

Book Review: The Red Atlas

The Red Atlas

The Red Atlas: How the Soviet Union Secretly Mapped the World

Intro: As the Head of The British Army predicts that Russia may start a war, a new book reveals they’ve had detailed maps of our secret military complexes for decades

FOLLOWING the events such as the storming of the Winter Palace in 1917, and the execution of the Tsar and the imperial family, the Russian Revolution ushered in a world of horror and mass death.

It was Stalin, the then General Secretary of the Communist Party, who personally signed-off the lists of execution quotas. He had avidly read and annotated torture reports and was responsible for sanctioning what was to befall. In 1937 and 1938 alone, more than 681,000 people received a bullet in the back of the neck.

Terror was used by the KGB and its forerunner, the NKVD (the secret police), to ensure obedience and to suppress discussion and dissent. As capitalism was overthrown, businesses were nationalised, private property was confiscated, and the mass media was controlled.

Government regulations and bureaucracy intensified, the dictatorship of the proletariat was imposed, and Stalin’s purges eliminated political rivals, scholars, artists, and anyone else who was of mild intelligence. In the Ukraine, food, grain and livestock were requisitioned and some 4 million people were deliberately starved – implemented through an organised famine, or genocide, to punish “anti-party elements and saboteurs”.

Had NATO not kept them the other side of the Iron Curtain, it was Stalin and his successors’ resolute ambition and intention to have brought their Marxist ideology to London.

 

PART of the enormous and secret infrastructure of the Cold War involved the Soviets creating amazingly detailed maps – useful for invading armies and occupiers – which were designed and intended to support civil administrators when the “entire world is communist”.

On the evidence of their maps of Britain they imagined they could one day possess, the authors write that the “Russians didn’t miss much”.

Using high-altitude aircraft, satellite imagery and missiles bearing reconnaissance cameras, the Russians plotted every inch of our islands, continually revising and redrawing the maps “to keep up with the transformation landscapes”.

The Russians also deployed people on the ground, quietly walking down the streets, looking. This was enacted through Le Carre-esque like double-agents who relayed back to Moscow details of factories, including their production outputs and ownership. The size and shape of buildings were of great interest. Every high-rise and low-rise in Southampton, for example, was known by the enemy.

The utilities, industries and transport systems were fully documented and recorded – the width of roads, the height and dimension of bridges, their load capacity and construction materials used. Local terrain was scrutinised – forests, the types of trees, height, girth and spacing. Railway signals, timetables, and even disused tracks were drawn, in case they could be reinstated.

The Russians were also very keen on marine areas and navigable rivers. They marked spot depths, dredged canals and tidal ranges. The water speed and flow at estuaries fascinated them: the Mersey at Liverpool, the Forth at Edinburgh, and the Medway at Rochester and Chatham. In 1919, all mapping activities were put under state supervision by Lenin.

It was Stalin, however, who created the Military Topographic Directorate of the General Staff of the Soviet Army. It was a massive secret enterprise involving thousands of people. Up to 2 million maps were made of the West, which were kept under armed guard in a series of 25 humidity-controlled vaults.

Even within the Soviet hierarchy, military officers who were required to use maps for training and exercises had no idea of the extent and scope of Stalin’s project. Every map and chart had to be returned to the depot after use.

It is no quip to suggest that the Russians knew more about Britain than the average British citizen. On our own Ordnance Survey maps, for instance, there are frequent blanks, known as security deletions. Sensitive information is excluded from public view.

With the help of their spies and saboteurs, however, the Kremlin knew all about our secret military installations and complexes. In their Red Atlas they drew every hut and barrack at the Royal Naval dockyard at Pembroke, an RAF flying boat base.

They knew the berth length and channel depth at Chatham, where submarines were built and maintained. They could have found their way blindfolded around the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Burghfield, near Reading, where nuclear warheads are constructed. Even Google Maps omitted this place until recently.

John Davies and Alexander J. Kent grow melancholic and pensive as they recount the story of the Soviet cartographic enterprise. That story has never been told until now. The maps themselves, which began to be leaked to the West after the pulling down of the Berlin Wall in 1989, have rarely been publicly displayed.

The craftsmanship involved is tremendously skilled. We are told that the “sheer beauty of the maps makes them mesmerising… the use of colours, lines and geometric shapes lends them an Art Deco feel.”

The Soviets transliterated many towns and cities for Warsaw Pact commanders. Rochester became Roczyste, Chatham labelled as Czetem, Herne Bay denoted as Hen-Bei, Margate became Magyt and Maidstone converted to Mejdsten.

Like William the Conqueror, it can be guessed where the Red Army planned to arrive on our shore. Sussex and Kent were in the firing line. The Soviets were also very interested in Cambridge: “The lodging houses and their lecture halls are reminiscent of monasteries or ancient castles . . . there is rain on 12-14 days each month.”

The university is where all the spies were educated: Philby, Burgess, Maclean, Blunt. Perhaps Moscow assumed their battalions would get a big welcome when they turned up there in force.

– The Red Atlas by John Davies and Alexander J. Kent is published by the University of Chicago Press for £26.50

Standard
Britain, Government, Legal, Politics, Society

Trolls could be stripped of the right to vote

ELECTION LAW

SOCIAL media trolls who abuse MPs could be stripped of their right to vote.

The Electoral Commission, the elections watchdog, said existing legislation on elections, which in part dates back to the 1800s, should be reviewed to bring laws up to date.

It suggested punishments for existing electoral offences, such as losing elected office or being disqualified from being registered as an elector, could also be used for those who abused MPs and candidates online.

“It may be that similar special electoral consequences could act as a deterrent,” the commission said.

A reform of electoral legislation would help in “clarifying and strengthening” existing offences and identifying any gaps in the law, the commission said in evidence to the Committee on Standards in Public Life, which is investigating the intimidation faced by parliamentary candidates.

The commission also recommended updating electoral law to take proper account of social media posts, so people could see who is responsible for material placed online.

Tom Hawthorn, head of policy at the Electoral Commission, said: “Our strong tradition of free elections are an essential part of a healthy democracy, and people should be able to stand for election and campaign without fear or abuse or intimidation.

“However, many offences in electoral law have not been reviewed or updated since they were first created in the 19th century.”

A Downing Street spokesman said Theresa May viewed the abuse and intimidation of candidates during the election as “unacceptable”, adding: “I think what she should say is that there is a clear difference between legitimate scrutiny and conduct that is fuelled by hate and personal abuse.”

COMMENT 

This is a good step forward by the Government in dealing with internet trolls who are clearly a menace to society. In addition, this writer would like to see additional measures to be considered by the UK Government in dealing with many of these social outcasts who appear to have nothing better to do all day. Other measures to be considered should include the sanctioning of benefits against those internet trolls who encroach or border on the criminality. Internet Service Providers (ISPs), too, should be made liable in banning such individuals from the internet. These measures, and those already announced by the Government, would go some way in removing this unwanted scourge from society.

Vile, rancid and spleen-venting abuse has no part to play in any society that wishes to preserve its freedoms, not jarred by thuggish morons intent on causing misery for others. We need legislation to reflect not only the protection of MPs and parliamentary candidates – who, it has to be said, have suffered the most appalling of abuses – but all citizens of this country wishing to make their voice heard.

In an opposing view:

“There are already perfectly adequate laws. It is an offence to incite violence, to act in a way that puts anyone in a state of fear and alarm, to make a breach of the peace or to indulge in racist, sexist and homophobic abuse.

“It may also be rather more difficult to draft effective new legislation than you might think. Words such as ‘trolling’ and ‘online abuse’ are dangerously nebulous, especially in the context of our long British tradition of cheerfully pillorying those in power. And there is no such thing as a right, in law, not to be offended.” [John MacLeod, Scottish journalist – September 21, 2017]

Standard