GCSB Protest March

Forums › Off topic › GCSB Protest March

1 | ... | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | ... | 48

853 posts

Ultimate Geek

#876793 13-Aug-2013 23:02

Campbell Live gives a lot more detail than that picture, worth a watch for the first few mins alone
http://www.tv3.co.nz/CAMPBELL-LIVE-Tuesday-August-13-2013/tabid/3692/articleID/94572/MCat/2908/Default.aspx

PaulBags

809 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#876807 13-Aug-2013 23:46

Klipspringer:
PaulBags: Anyone interested in seeing some billboards and posters up? Here's a PledgeMe link.

They've already met their target, but any extra will go on billboards in other towns, more posters, etc.

And if the bill fails ...

Tracy Watkins at Stuff reports:

The surveillance capabilities of police, the Security Intelligence Service and Defence Force will be beefed up if controversial spy legislation falls over, Prime Minister John Key says.

This is what some people overlook. Those agencies all have legal authority to intercept communications if they get (for Police and SIS anyway) a warrant for it.

What is being proposed is that the GCSB can continue to do the actual interception on their behalf as they have the expertise. If the bill fails, it won’t mean a single less domestic interception. It will just mean interception infrastructure will be duplicated and exist in multiple agencies, rather than one.

That’s not to say there are not some changes that can be made to the bill.

Either way. Legal interception is coming.

Big difference between legal surveillance of actual suspects using warrants, and de-facto unaccountable warrantless surveillance of everyone.

DonGould: I am surprised that National voters are happy to give this power to a Labour PM... or are they just thinking Labour will never make it back into power?

NZ isn't just a two party system, and Labour is dying a slow (and deserved) death. And they know that the Greens probably would repeal it, unlike Labour.

P1n3apqlExpr3ss: ** Image **

This image makes the Prime Minister look more competent than he appeared in the video clip.

MaxLV

656 posts

Ultimate Geek

#876808 13-Aug-2013 23:52

freitasm:
SaltyNZ: More good reasons not to have wholesale spying: the spies just aren't very good.

From the article:

n January 1991, as the Gulf War began, MI5 became convinced they had discovered a secret Iraqi terror organisation based in Britain.

They had found a list of thirty three Iraqis who were studying for PhDs in London. The list had been sent by the Iraq embassy in London to the Bank of England to ask the Bank not to freeze the grants the students lived on. The Bank sent the list to MI5 and the agents quickly realised that actually they were looking at something far worse - a nationwide Iraqi military terror cell.

The reason they knew this was because the person who sent the list was the deputy military attache at the embassy.

Immediately the police were told to swoop on the 33 "students" - and they were taken to a disused military camp at Rollestone in the middle of Salisbury plain and interned as prisoners of war. They were surrounded by two levels of high security razor wire and guarded by a hundred heavily armed soldiers.

It was the first time anyone had been held like this in Britain since the Second World War.

In fact the letter showed nothing of the kind. The Iraqi military attache was also in charge of administering student grants for Iraqis studying in Britain.

Some of them did get funding from the Iraqi military - for studying things like the structure of polymers. But, as a British professor pointed out, if that same interpretation were applied to British science students, over half of them would be immediately re-classified as terrorists.

An inquiry was held later that year into the scandal. It asked MI5 to produce its evidence. Other than the letter, the secret agents came up with nothing.

They had imagined the whole thing. But they justified it by saying

"It was best to err on the side of caution".

This reminds me of The Power of Nightmares where it's shown politicians use fear, through FUD to achieve things they need. Basically they create enemies, namely communism and extremism then use that to advance policies. Very interesting three part series produced by BBC.

It's obvious. They had used The Piglet Files (starring Nicholas Lyndhurst) as their training videos...

The Piglet files is a British sitcom produced by LWT (now part of ITV Studios). The show consisted of three series totalling 21 episodes that ran between 7 September 1990 and 10 May 1992.
The programme follows the life of reluctant MI5 agent Peter “Piglet” Chapman as he tries to instruct his fellow agents on the finer points of spy gadgetry while keeping his wife Sarah in the dark about his new career.

In the early 1990s, during the intervening period between the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union, MI5 combats the Soviet spies within the United Kingdom while facing the ineptitude of their own agents, the ridicule of the sheer fact that the Soviet Union is no longer a threat and not to mention the French. But MI5 knows better, and indeed, the Soviets are intent on making trouble.
In an effort to alleviate the incompetence of their agents, MI5 convinces and hires local university teacher Peter Chapman by getting him sacked from the university and leave him no other choice. His new bosses Maurice Drummond and Andrew Maxwell assign Peter to the technology division but there’s one thing. Peter now insists on having a codename, to further his identity in the world of spying. Peter originally asks for Puma, followed by Panther, however, these are already in use. And so, they pick the only remaining P name up for grabs: Piglet. "Piglet" routinely joins the other field agents on missions, but this is mainly to ensure that MI5 gets its equipment back.
And now, Peter “Piglet” Chapman must now face down Soviet assassins and double agents while keeping his identity as an MI5 technician secret from everyone else, including his wife Sarah.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Piglet_Files

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#876886 14-Aug-2013 09:06

PaulBags:
Klipspringer:
PaulBags: Anyone interested in seeing some billboards and posters up? Here's a PledgeMe link.

They've already met their target, but any extra will go on billboards in other towns, more posters, etc.

And if the bill fails ...

Tracy Watkins at Stuff reports:

The surveillance capabilities of police, the Security Intelligence Service and Defence Force will be beefed up if controversial spy legislation falls over, Prime Minister John Key says.

This is what some people overlook. Those agencies all have legal authority to intercept communications if they get (for Police and SIS anyway) a warrant for it.

What is being proposed is that the GCSB can continue to do the actual interception on their behalf as they have the expertise. If the bill fails, it won’t mean a single less domestic interception. It will just mean interception infrastructure will be duplicated and exist in multiple agencies, rather than one.

That’s not to say there are not some changes that can be made to the bill.

Either way. Legal interception is coming.

Big difference between legal surveillance of actual suspects using warrants, and de-facto unaccountable warrantless surveillance of everyone.

I think you missed the part I highlighted in bold.

SaltyNZ

8232 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#876924 14-Aug-2013 09:51

Klipspringer:

I think you missed the part I highlighted in bold.

No, I don't think he did. Nobody has forgotten that the police and the SIS can already do interceptions. The point is that they need to convince a judge that they have good enough reasons for doing so before they're allowed to. Such warrants are also eventually opened up to public scrutiny.

The GCSB bill effectively allows the PM to take that power for himself, and also allows the GCSB plenty of wiggle room to just suck up everything without a warrant, and allows it all to happen in secret so nobody ever knows.

The benefit of GCSB assistance in interception is minor at best, and, less charitably, a misdirection. The police and the SIS do not generally need a grab bag of Ian Fleming Q-division tricks to do interception: the data is collected and provided to them directly from network elements at the telco.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

ajobbins

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#876932 14-Aug-2013 10:03

I've just started watching Homeland. Seems particularly relevant at the moment.

Twitter: ajobbins

Woolly

119 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#878069 14-Aug-2013 12:46

Thanks for link to the billboard fund. Appears there is more than Snapper on the menu.

Not very good at sound bites as some TV soap stars are ;)

From RNZ article. http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/216557/opposition-to-keep-applying-pressure-on-gcsb-bill

"Parliament has debated most of the bill's committee stages but it won't come out of committee until at least 20 August, when the House resumes. The third and final reading is likely to be later that week."

I wonder if the urgency is because of the below?

The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement: http://tppinfo.org/
The Next Round of Negotiations: Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei August 27th, 2013

The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement ("TPP") is a free trade agreement currently being negotiated by nine countries: The United States, Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. Although the TPP covers a wide range of issues, this site focuses on the TPP's intellectual property (IP) chapter.The TPP suffers from a serious lack of transparency, threatens to impose more stringent copyright without public input, and pressures foreign governments to adopt unbalanced laws. Many of the same special interests that pushed for legislation like SOPA and PIPA have special access to this forum—including privileged access to the text as well as US negotiators.

Is there a money aspect to this?

GCSB bill will be to "Protect New Zealand's national security or economic well being". For Who?

Here's an article related to the GCHQ - UK http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/aug/02/gchq-accused-selling-services-nsa
"The documents also show that the Americans expect a return on their investment" - £100m

UK census links to Lockheed Martin http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/feb/19/census-boycott-lockheed-martin
"The company, which makes Trident nuclear missiles, cluster bombs and F-16 fighter jets, won the £150m contract to run the census on behalf of the Office for National Statistics
(ONS)."

Face Palm

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek

#878084 14-Aug-2013 13:13

Woolly:

Nice... I love the humour these issues bring out.

Where do you put your photos now so they're safe?

Clearly the cloud is not a good answer.

Promote New Zealand - Get yourself a .kiwi.nz domain name!!!

Check out mine - i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz - don@i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz

SaltyNZ

8232 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#878096 14-Aug-2013 13:32

I never really liked much Shakespeare anyway. On the other hand, the one I did like was MacBeth.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

Woolly

119 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#878137 14-Aug-2013 14:56

Credits to http://nevsramblings.blogspot.co.nz/2013/07/gcsb-dotcom-nsa-and-snowden.html for the humour.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#878157 14-Aug-2013 15:10

The thing I find most amusing is the assumption that spies operate within the law.

They do not and never have. They will continue to ignore laws that get in the way of doing what they need to do.

Imagine this scenario: they receive some credible intelligence that suggests that a massive airport - say LHR - will be targeted by some variety of fanatics with beards. In order to corroborate this (before shutting down just about the busiest airport in the world) they need to access some data that will break the law.

Do they (a) say "Aw shucks, the law of the land stops us reading that guy's email so we'll stand around wearing our backsides as hats and wait for the terrorists to attack."

or (b) say "Oh sod it - let's just read his email."

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#878161 14-Aug-2013 15:27

Geektastic: The thing I find most amusing is the assumption that spies operate within the law.

They do not and never have. They will continue to ignore laws that get in the way of doing what they need to do.

Imagine this scenario: they receive some credible intelligence that suggests that a massive airport - say LHR - will be targeted by some variety of fanatics with beards. In order to corroborate this (before shutting down just about the busiest airport in the world) they need to access some data that will break the law.

Do they (a) say "Aw shucks, the law of the land stops us reading that guy's email so we'll stand around wearing our backsides as hats and wait for the terrorists to attack."

or (b) say "Oh sod it - let's just read his email."

IMO its perfectly acceptable for government to be above the law.

Look up Sovereign immunity for more info. Its just that we not use to this kind of thing in NZ. In many other countries its perfectly acceptable.

It has its disadvantages. But I think its perfectly acceptable in a democracy. Why should the government have to operate inside the law to protect its citizens? It can't.

In places like Zimbabwe this immunity is abused to such an extent that if Robert Mugabe walks into a court room the judge has to step down.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79295 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#878198 14-Aug-2013 16:25

Klipspringer: IMO its perfectly acceptable for government to be above the law.

Look up Sovereign immunity for more info. Its just that we not use to this kind of thing in NZ. In many other countries its perfectly acceptable.

It has its disadvantages. But I think its perfectly acceptable in a democracy. Why should the government have to operate inside the law to protect its citizens? It can't.

In places like Zimbabwe this immunity is abused to such an extent that if Robert Mugabe walks into a court room the judge has to step down.

Sure. And Zimbabwe is a world leader in Human Rights and the economy there is one of the strongest in the world. What an example.

Governments should not be above the law.

PaulBags

809 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#878271 14-Aug-2013 18:52

SaltyNZ:
Klipspringer:

I think you missed the part I highlighted in bold.

No, I don't think he did.

Thanks :). I don't think Klipspringer realises the part he highlighted is pure bull.

I would be curious as to how exactly John Key plans to 'beef up' the interception cababilites of the police & SIS if the GCSB bill fails. Does he actually mean that technological and analytical assets will be transferred from the GSCB? In which case they won't have the legal capability to spy as indiscriminately as currently proposed. Or does he mean that a new bill will be presented to allow the police and/or SIS the same powers he is now trying to give the GCSB, and how well does he expect that to fly? Or does he mean something else?

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#878274 14-Aug-2013 18:55

It just means you get the CIA or MI5 to do it for you, because they are not governed by the same legislation...

1 | ... | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | ... | 48