The 5 Eyes Spy, hmm… network.
Some reports suggests or leave the impression that the five nations do not spy on each other and that would be a false conclusion.
Decades of evidence reveals mass surveillance and data mining crosses all borders and violates all privacy, especially on the internet.
Perhaps some would try to convince themselves that the five nations at least protect the citizens’ personal information, and again evidence exist that indicate personal information is being shared and/or sold for profit to corporations and nations such as Israel, et al.
Challenging the official story (and history), the mass media reports is required practice to escape the global institutional matrix of manipulative propaganda, and mind control. ~Ron
We’re talking about public data surveillance, or what closely resembles stalking.
There are plenty of ambiguous words used to describe big data monitoring, but few understand what it means or how deeply it’s abused behind the sealed doors at CSEC. Warrantless internet surveillance has the potential to track a target’s GPS movements with updating by the minute. It can penetrate the entire chain of communication between an individual and their contacts, including strangers who make reference to the target by any degree of separation across the world wide web. The technology has predictive behaviour capabilities. Every citizen caught in this widespread dragnet is psychologically assessed through language semantics and assigned a persuasion, to determine if any of them presents a public relations issue, or if the original target has too much influence to garner support for their business, political and/or social beliefs.
Five Eyes governments have established media surveillance programs specifically. They surveil news topics and journalists, to monitor the reporter’s effect on public perception. When anyone posts a news link on any form of social media, all comments are collected and ranked for government and law enforcement dissemination. Canada spent $20 million and hired 3,300 staff to spy on journalists and political opponents since 2012. The European Commission and United States does the same, in this vacuum of nonexistent legislation to protect the public’s privacy in the modern age. Instead of updating constitutional rights to reflect modern technology, they’ve crafted legislation like Bill C-13 that revokes those rights entirely. –freethepresscanada.org
An exclusive club: The five countries that don’t spy on each other
October 25, 2013
It was born out of American and British intelligence collaboration in World War II, a long-private club nicknamed the “Five Eyes.” The members are five English-speaking countries who share virtually all intelligence — and pledge not to practice their craft on one another. A former top U.S. counter-terrorism official called it “the inner circle of our very closest allies, who don’t need to spy on each other.”
This is the club that German chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois Hollande say they want to join — or at least, win a similar “no-spying” pact with the U.S. themselves.
It all began with a secret 7-page agreement struck in 1946 between the U.S. and the U.K., the “British-US Communication Agreement,” later renamed UKUSA. At first their focus was the Soviet Union and its Eastern European satellites. But after Canada joined in 1948, and Australia and New Zealand in 1956, the “Five Eyes” was born, and it had global reach. They pledged to share intelligence — especially the results of electronic surveillance of communications — and not to conduct such surveillance on each other. Whiffs of the club’s existence appeared occasionally in the press, but it wasn’t officially acknowledged and declassified until 2010, when Britain’s General Communications Headquarters, or GCHQ, released some of the founding documents.
Read Full Report: pbs.org
A CURIOUS FEDERAL CASE RAISES THE PROSPECTS OF A ROGUE ELEMENT WITHIN THE INTELLIGENCE WORLD
…there have been rumors that there is a rogue group or groups acting within the various agencies of the American national security police state. The rumors, you’ll recall, really began with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, for in my book LBJ and the Conspiracy to Kill Kennedy: A Coalescence of Interests, I pointed out that in the aftermath of the Soviet shoot down of Francis Gary Powers’ U-2 flight over Sverdlovsk(Ekaterinnenberg, site of the murder of Tsar Nicholas II, Tsarina Alexandra, and their children by the Communists, and home to much of the Soviet Union’s nuclear industry), Nikita Khrushchev then did a very curious thing: he did not blame President Eisenhower for the act. In fact, Eisenhower had indeed issued a moratorium on U-2 flights over Russia pending his upcoming summit with the Soviet Premier. What Khrushchev did do was to put the blame for the flight on rogue elements within American intelligence, which he called “American aggressive circles”, a point which, as I indicated in my book, was first brought to the world’s attention by JFK assassination researcher Jim Marrs in his book Crossfire: The Plot that Killed Kennedy.
The allegations of such rogue groups only grew, as popular radio talk show host Mae Brussel then expanded on this idea, fingering Nazi elements and their connections in American intelligence for the murder of President Kennedy. Others eventually came to similar conclusions: the late Senator Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) complained of such an element during the Iran-Contra period, former intelligence agent Terry Reed similarly complained in his book Compromised: Clinton, Bush, and the CIA, and investigator-researcher Rodney Stich joined the chorus in his 1994 book Defrauding America: A Pattern of Related Scandals. To this list one might add Bill Hamilton, president of the INSLAW corporation, who complained of the theft of his company’s PROMIS software during the Reagan Administration, and “suicided” investigative journalist Danny Casolaro, whose investigations into the INSLAW scandal led him into a rabbit hole of rogue groups and interconnections that he called “The Octopus.” Even Lyndon Baines Johnson himself alleged as much when he complained that the USA had been running a kind of “Murder Incorporated,” a statement that I personally have always viewed to be referencing the notorious “Permindex” corporation of the 1960s and its shady connections.
Now even The Washington Post is raising the question:
“Capping an investigation that began almost two years ago, separate trials are scheduled this month in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Va., for a civilian Navy intelligence official and a hot-rod auto mechanic from California who prosecutors allege conspired to manufacture an untraceable batch of automatic-rifle silencers.
“The exact purpose of the silencers remains hazy, but court filings and pretrial testimony suggest they were part of a top-secret operation that would help arm guerrillas or commandos overseas.
“The silencers — 349 of them — were ordered by a little-known Navy intelligence office at the Pentagon known as the Directorate for Plans, Policy, Oversight and Integration, according to charging documents. The directorate is composed of fewer than 10 civilian employees, most of them retired military personnel.
“Court records filed by prosecutors allege that the Navy paid the auto mechanic — the brother of the directorate’s boss — $1.6 million for the silencers, even though they cost only $10,000 in parts and labor to manufacture.“Much of the documentation in the investigation has been filed under seal on national security grounds. According to the records that have been made public, the crux of the case is whether the silencers were properly purchased for an authorized secret mission or were assembled for a rogue operation.
“A former senior Navy official familiar with the investigation described directorate officials as “wanna-be spook-cops.” Speaking on the condition of anonymity because the case is still unfolding, he added, ‘I know it sounds goofy, but it was like they were building their own mini law enforcement and intelligence agency.’”
It gets even more bizarre:
“Prosecutors have said that the silencers were acquired for a “special access program,” or a highly secretive military operation. A contracting document filed with the court stated that the silencers were needed to support a program code-named UPSTAIRS but gave no other details.”
But, a little later, the article suggests the real mystery might not even concern silencers at all:
“According to court papers filed by prosecutors, one directorate official told an unnamed witness that the silencers were intended for Navy SEAL Team 6, the elite commando unit that killed Osama bin Laden.“But representatives for SEAL Team 6 told federal investigators they had not ordered the silencers and did not know anything about them, according to the court papers.”
“The directorate official, Tedd Shellenbarger, flashed a set of credentials stamped with the letters LEO — an acronym for “law enforcement officer” — even though his office dealt primarily with policy matters and lacked law enforcement powers, the former senior Navy official said.”
Notably, the article concludes by implying – not surprisingly (after all, this is the Washington Post folks) – that the case may be about nothing more than simple graft and corruption and influence peddling:
“The badge inquiry led NCIS to discover e-mails and a paper trail pertaining to the $1.6 million contract to buy the silencers from Landersman, the California mechanic. Court papers describe him as a struggling small businessman who raced hot-rods and had declared bankruptcy in July 2012.
“He is the brother of David W. Landersman, the senior director for intelligence in the Navy directorate.
“Shellenbarger’s request prompted the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) to obtain a warrant to search the directorate’s offices at the Pentagon. Agents found badge materials and other documentation that led them to broaden their investigation, according to the former senior Navy official.”
All my high-octane-speculation instincts tell me that there’s more here, though, than simple graft, influence peddling, or corruption. One doesn’t go to the trouble of giving such an operation a suspicious code-name like “UPSTAIRS,” which could imply anything, from something involving space-related matters, to a possible covert operation directed against someone “upstairs,”, i.e., occupying a position of high power and authority, whether domestically or internationally. The amount of silencers involved also suggest a big covert assassination and “clean-up” operation, and it even has the faint but all-too-palpable air of the coup d’etat about it. But the bottom line is that every indication in the public record thus far, as summarized in the Post’s article, suggests that there is a rogue faction at work. The mere fact that it reaches as high as a Navy under-secretary is indication enough. And given the consistent indicators of such a rogue group or groups since the days of Eisenhower, this may represent yet another significant piece to a puzzle that has long exercised researchers and investigators. This is definitely a story worth watching closely, and your speculations are as good as mine…
Government Passes Anti-Constitutional Surveillance Law During Ottawa Shooting
At 10:13am EDT, The Globe and Mail‘s Josh Wingrove reported that tactical officers were pointing guns at every parliamentary journalist on site. (Post since removed from Twitter.)
At 12:11pm EDT, The CBC’s Kady O’Malley reported her group was ordered to leave a local rooftop by police, as they continued to search for a culprit and attempted to secure the area.
By 1:14pm EDT, Ms. O’Malley reported a continuing lockdown that blanketed Ottawa. She was unclear if the event was over, as no further information was available.
While Canadian news personalities were at police gunpoint, American outlets like CBS News and the Associated Press had a full story to sell, complete with the dead shooter’s name.
Before the scene was secure at 10:54am EDT, a joint release was published to identify the culprit. It stated,
“The gunmen has been identified by U.S. officials to CBS News as Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, a Canadian national born in 1982.”
By 4:58pm EDT, the story was edited to remove the shooter’s name, or any mention of the U.S. government’s knowledge.
The only problem is no one could update the Google database quick enough with these changes, so the original information still appeared with general search results.
The story was altered again in the evening, when the Canadian government allowed the name of a shooter to be released and American media added law enforcement to their list of official sources. They also added a middle name, Abdul, to emphasize the suspect’s Islamic ties with an accusation of terrorism.
As members of parliament begin to piece this tragedy together, they’re advised to inquire how American intelligence knew the name of a ‘possible terrorist’ as the mayhem was still unfolding. How did Americans know when Canadians didn’t, and how was this information so widespread that American media and Google had access to distribute, but domestic reporters on the scene did not.
John Pilger says in the film: “We journalists… have to be brave enough to defy those who seek our collusion in selling their latest bloody adventure in someone else’s country… That means always challenging the official story, however patriotic that story may appear, however seductive and insidious it is. For propaganda relies on us in the media to aim its deceptions not at a far away country but at you at home… In this age of endless imperial war, the lives of countless men, women and children depend on the truth or their blood is on us… Those whose job it is to keep the record straight ought to be the voice of people, not power.”