Controversial GCHQ Unit Engaged In Domestic Law Enforcement, Online Propaganda 83
Advocatus Diaboli writes: Documents published by The Intercept on Monday reveal that a British spy unit purported by officials to be focused on foreign intelligence and counterterrorism, and notorious for using "controversial tactics, online propaganda and deceit,” focuses extensively on traditional law enforcement and domestic activities. The documents detail how the Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group (JTRIG) is involved in efforts against political groups it considers "extremist," Islamist activity in schools, the drug trade, online fraud, and financial scams. The story reads: "Though its existence was secret until last year, JTRIG quickly developed a distinctive profile in the public understanding, after documents from NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed that the unit had engaged in 'dirty tricks' like deploying sexual 'honey traps' designed to discredit targets, launching denial-of-service attacks to shut down internet chat rooms, pushing veiled propaganda onto social networks, and generally warping discourse online."
doing it (Score:1)
doing it for the children
They don't have a focus, do they? (Score:1)
They are doing so many things at once, with activities ranging from countering Islamic extremism to online scam and everything in between
No wonder they can't do anything right!!
For example, the Birmingham school district was taken over Islamic extremists and that GCHQ unit did *NOTHING* to stop them
What is the use of having that unit if it can't even do anything right?
Re: (Score:1)
For example, the Birmingham school district was taken over Islamic extremists
Are you an American?
Re: And so, what is wrong with this? (Score:5, Insightful)
As a chap in England - you what? The IRA were scary maybe, the ISIS in England issue is mostly noise.
Re: (Score:1)
As a chap in England - you what?
JTRIG imposter derailing the discussion! Everyone knows a real Brit would've pronounced it "u wot m8"...
Re: (Score:1)
Of course the fundamentalist capitalists are the real concern. The zealot high priests of capitalism have of course actively corrupted UK intelligence organisation to turn them into anti-activism and anti-union organisation with a distinct Tory flavour, this after the active corruption of the Labour Party leadership by the same corrupt organisations.
All sorts of strange crap going on. First anti-EU and the pro-Eu, next joining in the push to move NATO forces eastward or is that just trying to kick as man
Re: (Score:2)
Right now Europe is far more scared of the US going out of control than they are of Russia
You're absolutely right. That's why Europeans are asking that Russia predeploy heavy weapons in their territory in case of military actions. [nytimes.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, the US via NATO doesn't want to end it's occupation of Europe but the pressure is on to remove US troops from more influential likely to become ex-NATO countries. NATO of course pumps war because the military industrial complex demands it and it drives fear because the dominant country does not ever want its military to leave Europe. Which country has murdered more people than the rest of the world combined in the last 25 years, in fact the only way other countries come close to catching up is joining
Re: (Score:1)
Murder has a definition and why restrict it to 25 years?
Re: (Score:2)
Have you not being paying attention? Why twenty five years, because some countries have been getting worse, USA, much worse and some countries have been getting better Russia and China. Yet main stream media claims the exact opposite of reality because of course they are part of that corporate empire, that psychopathic empire and all so vulnerable because it is only a few troubled pathetic individuals in their crazed delusions orchestrating things. No grand conspiracy of course, no course to the future, ju
Re: (Score:1)
I have been paying attention indeed. I still wonder why one looks at only 25 years of data and attempts to make a conclusion. You could probably draw the conclusions you want with the entirety of the data if you cared to use it. Additionally, lawful killings are not murder. Now we can debate whose laws apply if we want but that is not pertinent either. The US is responsible for all sorts of atrocities, some of which are killings, and this is not new.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Why'd arabs end up in deserts then? Good people drove them there. Al Tiquyya lies do not honesty make. A religion of peace that says to convert by fire and sword is no religion of peace. More like lying bullshit constantly.
Re: (Score:1)
Islam could be a culture. The word has multiple definitions. This is from TheSage which is a nice application but is not the OED or Webster's:
Lemma: culture
Noun
1. The raising of plants or animals.
2. (Biology) The growing of microorganisms in a nutrient medium (such as gelatin or agar).
3. The tastes in art and manners that are favored by a social group.
4. All the knowledge and values shared by a society.
5. The attitudes and behavior that are characteristic of a particular social group or organization.
6. A particular society at a particular time and place.
7. A highly developed state of perfection; having a flawless or impeccable quality.
Verb
1. Grow in a special preparation.
The three bold definitions, more so the fifth, could apply but I am not sure there is such a thing as a ubiquitous Islamic culture. All the Muslims that I know are quite peaceful and rather Westernized.
Re:And so, what is wrong with this? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it's more that a group which claims to be focused on external threats, and uses tactics that few would be comfortable using on citizens of their country, is focusing mostly on standard internal issues which are normally the purview of the regular police.
To put it another way, when I use my handgun to deal with an armed intruder to my home nobody would think ill of me. If I use that handgun to deal with my disobedient teenager then it's an entirely different issue. Even if the teenager is (for example) stealing from me just like the burgler was trying to, it's not an acceptable response. We have acceptable means to deal with our children, and a handgun is not on the menu.
Similarly, using DDOS, propaganda, and blackmail on your own citizens is not the appropriate response even if we may condone it against foreign nations in limited circumstances, just as we condone (at least in the United States) the use of handguns in limited circumstances.
Re: And so, what is wrong with this? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Have a look into the KGB, the GeStaPo, the numerous other secret police forces in the various historical and present totalitarian regimes. Hint: These people never serve the people, only ever those in power. The secrecy eliminates all possibility of meaningful oversight, and these people cannot keep themselves under control.
Re: (Score:1)
How the hell is this person's comment a troll? Moderate how you want but -1 Troll is not an acceptable, to me, substitute for, "I do not get it." I may not agree with the person above, it happens that I do, but this certainly is not a troll by any definition I can think of. Feel free to enlighten me if somebody would like but I do not get how that is a troll post. Not agreeing does not make it not a troll. Not understanding is not a reason to moderate it as a troll.
Re: (Score:2)
Internally the 1980's trade union ban was telling and the public could see the marching by UK staff to keep their union membership.
The union ban stayed in place for years and reflected on hours, working conditions and how the UK gov treated its own trusted security cleared staff.
The wider public and security researchers now fully understand cell-site tracking, dirtboxes, voice prints, junk global encryption standards, efforts against VPN, efforts to
Zeitgeist (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
The last time a significant fraction of us stood up for ourselves, we got shelled from orbit by our own media, by the mainstream media, by sites and institutions up and down the internet, and Slashdot joined right in. We know what happens to us when we stand up, and what Slashdot will do, so we're not going to bother getting worked up about it over here.
Sites like Slashdot now support the corruption and criminality going on in the modern world. It's sad to say it, but that's what's happened. I guess there m
Re: (Score:1)
Not the GP.
In a word? Peaceniks. People who pointed out that Iraq wasn't involved at all were abused, beaten, bullied, threatened, and insulted.
I was called "anti-American" because I pointed out that if you train enough terrorists, eventually they'll attack you. That, apparently, is anti-American sentiment rather than common sense.
Then we get people like you, you go all stupid hyperbole when someone points out that every time they tried to say something, they'd get a whole bunch of aggressive know-nothin
Re:Zeitgeist (Score:5, Insightful)
Very chilling if you know your home network is your work network and every word that is seen is collected.
Re: (Score:1)
I am not okay with them. I do not fear them either. They can soundly go fuck themselves. They know who I am and the little punks can come find me if they want to. I thought we weren't supposed to be scared of the terrorists and that that was the best way to fight them? I am certain I have heard this view and seen it supported. Why is cowardice okay when it is your government? Screw that. The NSA, CIA, FBI, and the likes can pound sand in their asses and come pay me a whiny visit if they are afraid of my att
Re: (Score:2)
Collective apathy or mental resignation to the topic coupled with a demoralizing feeling of helplessness....it's been 1984 for a long time now.
Too many people are still in favor of the surveillance society to waste effort getting really outraged.
The US does the same. (Score:2)
Certain IRC channels are being interfered by US professional trolls. They work in teams and create fake discussions to influence and to bait out radicals.
Here is one log of two of them trying to bait with supposedly secret information on drone technology. Notice that the main one mirrors radical ideas as bait, too.
http://pastebin.com/sfnkmDFD [pastebin.com]
I imagine that this is done to prevent another Snowden.
This is a popular online forum (Score:5, Insightful)
Bank of England and insight on investments (Score:3)
Continue provision of intelligence relating to risks to UK investment overseas
Both US and UK "surprisingly" boycotted an auction for the right to explore huge oil reserves in Brazil a few months after Dilma complained about the spying on Brazilians, herself and on Petrobras (the top deep sea oil exploration company in the world), driving the prices down.
Right now Petrobras is under investigation for corruption of some of its leaders, mostly related to the federal government party, it's stocks went down by a lot and most of the infrastructure investments / constructions are blocked. This is the only news here and we'll get American help on the investigations, even though we just refused German help on the Siemens case (the corrupts on that case are on the opposition party). Some people on the opposition party are involved in this Petrobras case as well, but the prosecutors decided there was no reason to investigate them. Seems like they jumped out at the right time and then, after decades of corruption (according to the case witnesses), it started falling down.
I hope people stop talking like economic espionage is a Chinese only thing.
Re: (Score:1)
So what I get from your post is that through some sort of intelligence/espionage the US and UK investors avoided getting pulled into some money losing scam involving corrupt Petrobras and Brazilian officials. Sounds like due diligence to me, not economic espionage.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe you are right and it is just a coincidence that Petrobras (an oil company from a pacific country) was an espionage target, in which case the spying was really unexplai
The Propaganda Burqa (Score:1)
pushing veiled propaganda onto social networks
Does that mean lots and lots of pictures of the Queen in a revealing burqa? Or do they mostly post pictures of Putin in a burqa? Two peas in a pod, those spies and the spies.
All part of (Score:1, Insightful)
This was all started for President Bush as part of the international war on terror. The rise of ISIS has excused spying on children. Which is strange since most converts are self-radicalized. Everyone calls such converts, disaffected youth, which is probably true, but I notice no politician is demanding better education and support services for at-risk teenagers: That's not part of the 'war-plan' in any country.
Since when? (Score:3)
The OP states that GCHQ is, "purported by officials to be focused on foreign intelligence and counterterrorism". Since when?
My understanding has always been that there are 3 main "legs" to British Intelligence:
In this context, GCHQ should have always been providing internal communications intelligence for MI5, I'm not sure why this should be news to anyone?
-- Pete.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? REALLY?
No. CSE, NSA, GCHQ, NZ/AUS's agencies, all of 'em have explicit laws preventing them from operating internally. And here you are, saying no no, they've always been allowed to do this. What the hell, Pete, what the hell.
Re: (Score:1)
No. CSE, NSA, GCHQ, NZ/AUS's agencies, all of 'em have explicit laws preventing them from operating internally.
From the Intelligence Services Act 1994 [legislation.gov.uk] you will see that GCHQ's powers are quite well defined.
This involves giving advice and assistance "to any other organisation which is determined for the purposes of this section" - which includes MI5 (Security Service) as they are a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee [legislation.gov.uk]. And the constraints are:
Re: (Score:3)
Congratulations Pete, you're one of those persons who is capable of taking a complicated, confusing law, and twisting it so as to make it look like what these agencies are doing is legal, when they are clearly not. As long as people like you exist, and they always will, it goes to show why we should never trust the government to have these sorts of capabilities.
Snoop on property within the UK .. fucks sakes, you realize we're talking about people here right. Nah, best to call it property and further dista
Re: (Score:2)
As long as people like you exist, and they always will, it goes to show why we should never trust the government to have these sorts of capabilities.
Snoop on property within the UK .. fucks sakes, you realize we're talking about people here right. Nah, best to call it property and further distance yourself from what this really means.
Shame on you.
You appear to be mistaking someone who is stating the facts of the situation for someone who agrees with the situation.
Laws should be written simly, cleanly, and transparently, and the security forces of a nation should be working for the greater good of the nation rather than against the native citizens of that nation.
As an aside, I have spent most of my working life working (both as an employee, and as a contractor) with a company that is alleged to have been a direct target of GCHQ [spiegel.de].
-- Pete.
Re: (Score:3)
There were supposed to be very clear limits on what techniques GCHQ could use inside the UK and against UK citizens. Like most countries, the UK treats foreigners as somewhat less human than its own citizens.
The revelation is that GCHQ breaks the law in the UK on a regular basis, and acts against the interests of UK citizens on a regular basis. The emergency legislation last month that was quietly slipped through was simply to make some of their illegal activities legal.
And just like that, UK has a GeStaPo.... (Score:3)
Fascinating, how politicians never learn anything from history.
Re:And just like that, UK has a GeStaPo.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course they've learned from history! If you want to keep power, you need to distract the citizenry. They should be so preoccupied that they can't deal with some nebulous concept of having only the illusion of privacy. High unemployment, stagnant wages, but just enough entertainment to make sure the masses don't get off their couches after a long day. If you want to keep power, you need to know who the subversives are, because if they ever do get into a position of being able to do something, you want to have enough dirt on them to shut them down before things get out of hand. Or, more likely, have enough powerful media voices repeating the mantra that everything is okay, to drown out the voices that are pointing out what's actually wrong.
They saw how it failed in East Germany, in the old countries, where force accompanied the spying. Now they know that they need to cover their asses - pass laws that vaguely sound like they allow what you're doing. Have secret courts that are "independent" that rubber stamp whatever you want. Parallel engineering for cases where the information was gleaned illegally. I don't think these systems fell apart because of their secret police tactics, but rather a culmination of other various factors - economics, and seeing how things operated outside of their ridiculous bubble. So the Americans, Canadians, etc, made their bubble that much larger, so that they can say "Everyone else is doing this as well, quit complaining".
To be fair - this isn't the politicians per se - but rather the establishment, the bureaucracy. The politicians buy their lines about public safety and security hook line and sinker, and why not, they were paid for by the powerful, who want to ensure that they'll maintain the status quo. A small subset of the population will buy whatever it is their politician is selling, and it's just enough to give them a glean of credibility and legitimacy.
No, the only people who haven't learned from history are the citizens. The citizens who keep thinking that professional politicians are capable of fixing anything, of accomplishing anything, despite leading *democracies* into unjust wars time and time and time and time and time again. That politicians are capable of getting a handle on the bureaucracy, to prevent corruption and incompetence. Hah. To be clear - I'm not advocating we go to anarchy and get rid of government. No, we need democracy and even a *representative* democracy, but the representation has to be fair and equitable - it can't lean way out of proportion to represent the rich and powerful, which is what most every democracy has right now, because elections are such an easy thing to subvert. A democracy must be completely open and transparent, otherwise corruption and incompetence, hand in hand with secrecy, grows and spreads like a cancer. Until more people realize this, and decide to do something about it, things won't get any better.
Re: (Score:2)
And as you say, it doesn't flow from politicians, per se. You only have to look at the unproven, but plausible reports [wikipedia.org] of the security services pursuit of Prime Minister Harold Wilson [theguardian.com] to realise that elected politicians too may be the target if they are suspected by the establishment of deviating too far from the status quo.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. An that is the real threat: Everybody has something to hide and has done things they rather would not have public knowledge. Collect data on everybody and you can easily make sure any political candidate does not get voted into office, etc. All the secret agencies are preparing to take over the world. As these organizations have no ethics at all, this will make the Dark Ages look like paradise.
While I did not believe it for a long time, it seems most of the dystopian predictions for the information
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, you are right. Fascism is raising its ugly head all over this planet again. Until stopped, the cost will be extreme. We now also know that democracy seems incapable of stopping it (big surprise: Hitler was _voted_ into office....). I wonder whether Humanity will raise again from the coming dark age or whether we are slowly entering the end-game.
Honey Traps (Score:2)