Steven Gaal Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 GCHQ spying on rights groups ‘illegal’ ============================== http://rinf.com/alt-news/latest-news/gchq-spying-rights-groups-illegal/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Britain Using PsyOps Domestically to Encourage “Conformity” By Derrick Broze Global Research, June 26, 2015 The Anti-Media 24 June 2015 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- According to newly released documents published byThe Intercept, a special unit with the British spy agency is involved in psychological operations, or PsyOps, and propaganda campaigns against groups it labels “extremist.” The documents are the latest from the trove released by whistleblower Edward Snowden. The new documents show that the British Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) operates an elite unit known as the Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group (JTRIG). First revealed last year, JTRIG is known for using sexual “honey traps” to discredit targets, using denial-of-service attacks to shut down Internet chat rooms, and generally pushing propaganda on social media. Despite official claims that JTRIG is focused on international targets in Iran or Afghanistan, the latest information reveals that the unit was focusing on domestic activity within the U.K.—activity typically monitored by local police or domestic law enforcement agencies. The Intercept reports: An August 2009 JTRIG memo entitled ‘Operational Highlights’ boasts of ‘GCHQ’s first serious crime effects operation’ against a website that was identifying police informants and members of a witness protection program. Another operation investigated an Internet forum allegedly ‘used to facilitate and execute online fraud.’ The document also describes GCHQ advice provided ‘to assist the UK negotiating team on climate change.’ Particularly revealing is a fascinating 42-page document from 2011 detailing JTRIG’s activities. It provides the most comprehensive and sweeping insight to date into the scope of this unit’s extreme methods. Entitled ‘Behavioral Science Support for JTRIG’s Effects and Online HUMINT [Human Intelligence] Operations,’ it describes the types of targets on which the unit focuses, the psychological and behavioral research it commissions and exploits, and its future organizational aspirations. It is authored by a psychologist, Mandeep K. Dhami. The documents (Behavioural Science Support for JTRIG’S Effects and Online HUMINT Operations,U.K. Ministry Stakeholder Relationships Spreadsheets) outline tactics employed by the agency, including ways to manipulate public opinion, understand human thinking and behavior, and encourage conformity. According to the documents, JTRIG “currently collaborates with other agencies,” including the Metropolitan police, the Security Service (MI5), the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA), the Border Agency, Revenue and Customs (HMRC), and the National Public Order and Intelligence Unit (NPOIU). One of JTRIG’s objectives includes “monitoring ‘domestic extremist groups such as the English Defence League by conducting online HUMINT’; ‘denying, deterring or dissuading’ criminals and ‘hacktivists’; and ‘deterring, disrupting or degrading online consumerism of stolen data or child porn.” One of the reports from 2011 outlines JTRIG’s tactics, including uploading YouTube videos containing “persuasive communications,” starting Facebook groups and Twitter accounts, and creating fake online personalities and supporters “to discredit, promote distrust, dissuade, deter, delay or disrupt.” JTRIG also relies on an understanding of psychology which is “critical” to operations. The unit used social media campaigns to encourage and foster “obedience” and “conformity”. Section 3.6 Obedience, says compliance can be achieved by “engendering liking (attractiveness); instilling a sense of scarcity or secrecy; getting compliance to a small request at first.” Essentially, the U.K. government is using an elite unit of spies to launch psychological operations on “extremists” by creating fake accounts and videos to promote conformity and obedience. However, the practice is not exclusive to the U.K.. PsyOps are used by nations around the world. The 2002 edition of the Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms defines psychological operations as integrated employment of the core capabilities of electronic warfare, computer network operations, psychological operations, military deception, and operations security, in concert with specified supporting and related capabilities, to influence, disrupt, corrupt or usurp adversarial human and automated decision making while protecting our own. Since that time, PsyOp has fallen out of favor and the term is now officially known as Military Information Support Operations, or MISO. It is defined as Planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals in a manner favorable to the originator’s objectives. The United States military was famously caught using psychological operations in 2011, when Rolling Stone reported that “the U.S. Army illegally ordered a team of soldiers specializing in ‘psychological operations’ to manipulate visiting American senators into providing more troops and funding for the war.” Indeed, the operations seem crucial to the mission of the United States government (and totalitarian governments around the globe, for that matter). According to the leaked U.S. Special Forces counterinsurgency manual: PSYOP [Psychological Operations] are essential to the success of PRC [Population & Resources Control]. For maximum effectiveness, a strong psychological operations effort is directed toward the families of the insurgents and their popular support base. The PSYOP aspect of the PRC program tries to make the imposition of control more palatable to the people by relating the necessity of controls to their safety and well-being. PSYOP efforts also try to create a favorable national or local government image and counter the effects of the insurgent propaganda effort. Without a doubt, the U.S. government continues to label its own population “extremist” and is focusing its propaganda efforts domestically. The U.S. Special Forces Counterinsurgency Manual—as well as the new Snowden documents—should be required reading for all revolutionaries seeking to understand the tactics of the U.S. government. Only by educating ourselves can we hope to form a united, empowered front against government tyranny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 (edited) UK Government's surveillance plans could put citizens, economy and entire internet at risk, argue leading computing experts Proposals are 'unworkable in practice, raise enormous legal and ethical questions, and would undo progress on security at a time when internet vulnerabilities are causing extreme economic harm', leading experts argue - Andrew Griffin independent/uk - The British and US Government’s plans to weaken online security are “unworkable” and contribute to “extreme economic harm”, a group of the world’s leading computer experts have said. Authorities including David Cameron and FBI director James Comey have said that tech companies shouldn’t use end-to-end encryption, which stops messages from being snooped on. Such technology is used in apps like iMessage and WhatsApp, to ensure that messages can't be read as they pass between people. But a new report from some of the world’s leading computing experts argues that giving intelligence agencies access “will open doors through which criminals and malicious nation states can attack the very individuals law enforcement seeks to defend”. Tech companies have long argued that opening up back doors to surveillance agencies inevitably means that other actors will exploit them, weakening security. Proposals to give intelligence agencies exceptional access to communications are “unworkable in practice, raise enormous legal and ethical questions, and would undo progress on security at a time when Internet vulnerabilities are causing extreme economic harm”.read morePrivacy watchdog launches 'Did GCHQ spy on you?' campaign to allow citizens to find out if they were under surveillanceGCHQ spying on British citizens was unlawfulGCHQ and NSA broke antivirus software so that they could spy on people“If law enforcement’s keys guaranteed access to everything, an attacker who gained access to these keys would enjoy the same privilege,” the report argues. The British and US governments’ preferred approach would also make such an attack more likely to succeed, they argue, since giving the keys needed to unlock encryption over to spying organisations would make them more likely to be lost. David Cameron and the rest of the Government have long argued that encryption is dangerous — in January, Cameron said that he didn’t want to allow any encrypted communications, and the home secretary Theresa May intends to push through legislation that will force tech companies to make their users’ data available to governments. They say that keeping communications secret helps terrorists, since they can use networks to communicate without surveillance from the authorities. The new MIT report is named ‘Keys Under Doormats’ and is written by a group of computer scientists many of whom were part of an influential report that helped stop similar legislation being passed at the beginning of the modern internet. They argue that the new challenge is “even greater today than it would have been 20 years ago”. “In the wake of the growing economic and social cost of the fundamental insecurity of today’s Internet environment, any proposals that alter the security dynamics online should be approached with caution,” they argue in the 26-page report. “. The complexity of today’s Internet environment, with millions of apps and globally connected services, means that new law enforcement requirements are likely to introduce unanticipated, hard to detect security flaws. “Beyond these and other technical vulnerabilities, the prospect of globally deployed exceptional access systems raises difficult problems about how such an environment would be governed and how to ensure that such systems would respect human rights and the rule of law.” The experts' criticisms echo the same ones made by many tech companies. Apple's Tim Cook said in June for instance that the company believes "people have a fundamental right to privacy", and Facebook said yesterday that it feels "weakening encryption presents a variety of other security issues". Edited July 9, 2015 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 12, 2015 Share Posted July 12, 2015 (edited) Another Unreported Plot To Increase Censorship War criminal Tony Blair has often said that one of his biggest mistakes was to create the Freedom of Information Act. And no wonder, since our one-time Prime Minister had a preference for secrecy. Since its birth, the FoI Act has been widely and effectively used by citizens and journalists alike. Source URL: http://www.acclaimednews.com/my-stomach-sank-when-i-heard-their-secret-plot-to-increase-censorship.html mtaxonomy: Edited July 12, 2015 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/19/britain-s-royal-nazi-cover-up0.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 When will the government tell us what kind of free speech it's going to ban? http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2015/07/20/when-will-the-government-tell-us-which-bits-of-free-speech-i Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 (edited) The speech the government of the UK likes !!!!!!!!!!!!!! ,gaal ======================================================== Porn websites visited 250,000 times on parliament computers Published: July 27, 2015 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Source: RT “I will do whatever it takes to keep our children safe.” Over 247,000 attempts were made to visit X-rated websites from the UK Parliament’s computer network last year, with the numbers spiking during parliamentary recess in April, a Freedom of Information (FOI) request has revealed. Attempts to access more than 42,000 sites classed as pornographic were made during April alone last year, totaling more than 1,300 each day. The Freedom of Information request by the Daily Express found the second most active month was October 2014, where there were more than 30,000 attempts to access porn sites. The figures don’t show which sites were accessed or how long was spent on the pages. The findings add to the previous total of 350,000 in 2013. Taxpayers’ Alliance Chief Executive Jonathan Isaby said of the figures: “Some of these ‘visits’ are no doubt the product of pop-ups beyond anybody’s control, but the number is absolutely staggering.“One would hope that those attempting to access these sites at Parliament could keep their extra-curricular activities safely within their own four walls, as it’s not an appropriate use of time when it’s on the taxpayers’ tab,” he added. Speaking about the 2013 results, a House of Commons spokeswoman said: “We do not consider the data to provide an accurate representation of the number of purposeful requests made by network users due to the variety of ways in which websites can be designed to act, react and interact and due to the potential operation of third party software.”Prime Minister David Cameron has previously vowed to block pornographic material from “the darkest corners of the internet.”“For a lot of children, watching hardcore pornography is in danger of becoming a rite of passage,” he said in 2013. Edited July 27, 2015 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted July 28, 2015 Share Posted July 28, 2015 I think that since all posts from #3 onwards have been from Steven we can conclude that this thread has run its course. Thread closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts