In one short sentence em, paragraph. I think its more likely a bluff to
try and justify the requirement for blanket monitoring without the need
to justify the requirements, necessity, proportionality etc..
No doubt the governments will now be chiming in with"told you so" and
conveniently "terrorist attacks" will escalate as a consequance.
My cynicism getting in the way as usual...... now to analyse the piece
more thoroughly methinks.
On 14/06/2015 19:59, Douglas Rankine wrote:
NEWSFLASH: Sunday Times Article
See url: http://cryptome.org/2015/06/ru-cn-snowden-1m-docs.htm
Oh! Dear! What a terrible tizwaz. The UK Prime Minister, The Home
Secretary, the Secret Services and the Intelligence service have only
just realised that the Edward Snowden documents have been cracked by
the Russians and Chinese, and urgent moves have had to be made to
pull back our spies and agents in the front line, so that the Russians
and Chinese won’t catch them in the field. All our tradecraft has
been revealed to them, but no spies or agents have been killed or
captured, which is such a relief, at least Snowden isn’t a murderer,
just a traitor. whistleblower and most inconvenient person, who should
only get 150 years when he returns to the USA for a fair trial.
Isn’t it just terrible that those primitive Russians and Chinese with
their concrete brains, ancient security and intelligence services,
have compromised 5 Eyes most advanced security techniques, which Mr.
Snowden, as the epitome of absolute, top of the hill, NSA security,
if not anonymity, has been using to hide his documents so that they
can be fed to the Western news media in dribs and drabs. All those
journalists could be out of a job, if they are subverted by the
Russians and Chinese.
Now that the stuff is no longer a big secret, perhaps the time has
come for them all to come clean and declassify them, so that we, the
taxpayers and citizens of the world, can have a look at them, analyse
them and help discover any vulnerabilities and make suggestions as to
improving encryption and improving civil liberties, as well as, at the
same time helping the nation states to protect us from the criminals,
money launderers, terrorists, war mongers, arms dealers and child
molesters throughout the world.
Dammit! That idealist streak of mine keeps getting in the way.
Now, what do all the spies and spooks, goons and agents on here think
of the Sunday Times article...Do you think it is a black op, or a grey
op, a diversionary tactic to try and protect the right of government
ministers to issue warrants on behalf of the state, rather or as well
as the justiciary, on the flimsiest of evidence, or to re-inforce the
need to continue with bulk collections and store the stuff in all
those huge data silos for future use?
It’s OK...guys and gals, the questions are rhetorical, no need to
expose yourselves and blow your cover on here, it has already been
done for you...:-). Apparently, the Russians and Chinese have got
all the information anyway... J.
It couldn’t be the fact that the inquiry “A Question of Trust” has
been published and does a roundup of most of the techniques and skills
and tradecraft, in an open source way, and is somewhat of an
embarrassment for a democratic government, which has been subverting
citizens rights surreptitiously, and via confusion and economies of
truth, hiding the extent of their double talk and hypocrisy? And the
media accept it hook, line and sinker. The times are long gone when
the Sunday Times had a good investigative journalist team. Nowadays,
they rely on government handouts and lazy internet research, rehashing
and re-circulating articles without checking and double checking
them. No wonder I don’t buy newspapers these days... J.
N.B. “A Question of Trust” is really getting interesting, especially
the bit on technology.