Sweden approves Echelon!

[Meshugger]

This has to be the vet dream of all the hawks in Washington, and ironically it has been approved in a country that hasn't been in war for the last 250 years. So peaceloving and neutral, that the military gets the authority snoop and record every.single.electronic.signal., including VoIP, E-mail, Phonecalls, Textmessages, Fax, and of course, TCP/IP, that goes outside the Swedish borders. The Swedish parliament approved the new law with the votes of 143-138.

 

"FRA", as the new system is called, proudly puts Sweden as the country with the lowest respect for it's private citizens integrity in the EU, according to Privacy International. None to worry Romania and Bulgaria, your countries would not even dream of having that kind of power. Since Sweden now falls out of European standards of respect of privacy, it now has to look elsewhere, and has found partnership with the proud nation of South Africa.

 

Link (in finnish only).

Link (in swedish only).

 

The system that the military will use can be found at the Top 500 list of the most powerful clusters in the world, listed as the 11th most powerful, not too shabby with 13728 cores and a max rate of 102.80 TFlops, is it?

Edited June 19, 2008 by Meshugger

[Gorth]

Strange, the only way to win seem to be not to play >_

 

The concept is old though, Uncle Sam has been snooping on European emails, phone calls, business secrets etc. for almost a decade http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/503224.stm

[Meshugger]

The difference is that the US and Britain deny that such a thing even exists, while the swedish counterpart was voted through in the open by the Swedish parliament.

[Kaftan Barlast]

My first reaction to this was to wonder just what the hell our politicians are thinking. Apart from being a gross violation of our rights and the first thing Ive ever classified as plain "unswedish", there is absolutely no need or practical function for this law. There is no terrorist threat whatsoever, even bin laden himself once used Sweden as an example of a country so insignificant that al-qaeda would never ever bother. And even if there was a threat, the system has been deemed useless by experts in the intelligence field, as the volume of information is too high and that it cant bypass even the simplest forms of encryption. A supposed terrorist would have to write something like: "at 13:45 on tuesday the 12th of august 2008, im going to release sarine gas at Pillesnoppv

[Meshugger]

Pillesnoppv

Edited June 19, 2008 by Meshugger

[Meshugger]

"By introducing these new measures, the Swedish government is following the examples set by governments ranging from China and Saudi Arabia to the U.S. government's widely criticized eavesdropping program,"

 

- Peter Fleischer, Google's global privacy counsel.

 

More info here. And in english this time!

[Xard]

swedes...

 

Too bad I think our politicians are nowadays enough dimwits to do that too.

 

Luckily the Big Bear in our neighbour means no one would seriously campaign for anything like that

Edited June 19, 2008 by Xard

[Walsingham]

I've never considered Echelon such a big deal. Or, rather, it is a big deal, and well worth the money; but its intrusion into the life of Joe Average is nil. Whereas it's been used countless times against the IRA, and probably Al Qaeda. Our societies are high energy systems, and high energy systems ahve to be in either a state of natural chaotic flux (like a storm) or they have to be highly regulated. 'S just scieeeeence.

[Meshugger]

I've never considered Echelon such a big deal. Or, rather, it is a big deal, and well worth the money; but its intrusion into the life of Joe Average is nil. Whereas it's been used countless times against the IRA, and probably Al Qaeda. Our societies are high energy systems, and high energy systems ahve to be in either a state of natural chaotic flux (like a storm) or they have to be highly regulated. 'S just scieeeeence.

 

Ah, if it's a question of philosophy, then i choose Voltaire (Chaos) and maybe Spinoza (The golden route, a bit unspecified). Rather face the difficulties with living an a more open and maybe caotic society, than one that chooses to control itself.

[Humodour]

Note to self: "We don't go to Sweden."

 

Also of interest is this: http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/06/18/0048234

[Xard]

Note to self: "We don't go to Sweden."

 

Also of interest is this: http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/06/18/0048234

 

 

edit: I'm reading it now.

 

"Destruction notice: Destroy by any method that must prevent disclosure of contents or reconstruction of the document."

 

Edited June 19, 2008 by Xard

[Guest Accept]

Swedish Freedom

 

1809 - 2008

 

RIP

 

And to make the day even worse we lost against Russia in soccer.

[Xard]

...just like in war back in 1809

 

I can hardly believe what I'm reading. I know it was very naive but... I never imagined U.S Goverment was ruthless enough to make ****ing handbook out of all this sort of stuff. Sure individual documents and all but... not some Encyclopedia Torturus

[Walsingham]

Note to self: "We don't go to Sweden."

 

Also of interest is this: http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/06/18/0048234

 

Can someone highlight for me the juicy bits? All I see is some perfectly standard (and boring) stuff about conducting operations, and some rather dubious allegations by journalists about the intent being to replicate El Salvador. The most juicy thing I can see is about conducting hasty interrogations, but even then this simply consists of the kind of stuff openly discussed in The Interrogator's War By Sgt. Chris Mackey. Which is about as civilised as can be expected.

[Xard]

Click

 

"Civilian Self-Defense Forces [Paramilitaries, or, especially in an El-Salvador or Colombian civil war context, right wing "death squads"]

 

When a village accepts the CSDF program, the insurgents cannot choose to ignore it. To let the village go unpunished will encourage other villages to accept the government's CSDF program. The insurgents have no choice; they have to attack the CSDF village to provide a lesson to other villages considering CSDF. In a sense, the psychological effectiveness of the CSDF concept starts by reversing the insurgent strategy of making the government the repressor. It forces the insurgents to cross a critical threshold-that of attacking and killing the very class of people they are supposed to be liberating.

 

To be successful, the CSDF program must have popular support from those directly involved or affected by it. The average peasant is not normally willing to fight to his death for his national government. His national government may have been a succession of corrupt dictators and inefficient bureaucrats. These governments are not the types of institutions that inspire fight-to-the-death emotions in the peasant. The village or town, however, is a different matter. The average peasant will fight much harder for his home and for his village than he ever would for his national government. The CSDF concept directly involves the peasant in the war and makes it a fight for the family and village instead of a fight for some faraway irrelevant government. "

 

OR

 

Security forces can induce individuals among the general populace to become informants. Security forces use various motives (civic-mindedness, patriotism, fear, punishment avoidance, gratitude, revenge or jealousy, financial rewards) as persuasive arguments. They use the assurance of protection from reprisal as a major inducement. Security forces must maintain the informant's anonymity and must conceal the transfer of information from the source to the security agent. The security agent and the informant may prearrange signals to coincide with everyday behavior.

 

 

OR

"

Whenever a suspect is apprehended during an operation, a hasty interrogation takes place to gain immediate information that could be of tactical value."

 

OR

 

The insurgent's underground cells or infrastructure must be neutralized first because the infrastructure is his main source of tactical intelligence and political control. Eliminating the infrastructure within an area achieves two goals: it ensures the government's control of the area, and it cuts off the enemy's main source of intelligence. An intelligence and operations command center (IOCC) is needed at district or province level. This organization becomes the nerve center for operations against the insurgent infrastructure. Information on insurgent infrastructure targets should come from such sources as the national police and other established intelligence nets and agents and individuals (informants).

 

 

OR

Psychological Operations

 

PSYOP can support the mission by discrediting the insurgent forces to neutral groups, creating dissension among the insurgents themselves, and supporting defector programs. Divisive programs create dissension, disorganization, low morale, subversion, and defection within the insurgent forces. Also important are national programs to win insurgents over to the government side with offers of amnesty and rewards. Motives for surrendering can range from personal rivalries and bitterness to disillusionment and discouragement. Pressure from the security forces has persuasive power.

 

 

OR

 

Legal Considerations. All restrictions, controls, and DA measures must be governed by the legality of these methods and their impact on the populace. In countries where government authorities do not have wide latitude in controlling the population, special or emergency legislation must be enacted. This emergency legislation may include a form of martial law permitting government forces to search without warrant, to detain without bringing formal charges, and to execute other similar actions.

 

OR

 

Restrictions. Rights on the legality of detention or imprisonment of personnel (for example, habeas corpus) may be temporarily suspended. This measure must be taken as a last resort, since it may provide the insurgents with an effective propaganda theme. PRC [Population & Resources Control] measures can also include curfews or blackouts, travel restrictions, and restricted residential areas such as protected villages or resettlement areas. Registration and pass systems and control of sensitive items (resources control) and critical supplies such as weapons, food, and fuel are other PRC measures. Checkpoints, searches, roadblocks; surveillance, censorship, and press control; and restriction of activity that applies to selected groups (labor unions, political groups and the like) are further PRC measures.

 

OR

 

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.

 

 

List just goes on and on and on and on

Edited June 19, 2008 by Xard

[Walsingham]

I read all those before. What PRECISELY is the problem?

[Xard]

What is the problem apart from advocating censorship, torturing, bribery, restricting labour and political parties, unethical acts of violence, traning paramilitary groups etc.?

 

It violates human rights in every possible way.

[Walsingham]

What is the problem apart from advocating censorship, torturing, bribery, restricting labour and political parties, unethical acts of violence, traning paramilitary groups etc.?

 

It violates human rights in every possible way.

 

I've only been skim-reading, but I don't see any reference to torture. If you see it, help me out. The 'hasty interrogation' you picked on seemed to revolve around showing a subject maps, and taking them up in a plane. I see they mention the unsettling effect of being in a plane for a groundslogging peasant, but beyond that... Seriously, I'm not trying to be a ****. I don't see it.

[Xard]

This made me giggle

 

"A basic premise of U.S. Foreign policy is that the security of United States and its fundamental values and insitutions will be preserved and enhanced as part of a community of truly free and independent nations. In this regard, the United States endeavors to encourage other countries to do their part in the preservation of this freedom and independence. The objective is to support U.S. interests by means of common effort."

 

bwahahahaha

[Walsingham]

This made me giggle

 

"A basic premise of U.S. Foreign policy is that the security of United States and its fundamental values and insitutions will be preserved and enhanced as part of a community of truly free and independent nations. In this regard, the United States endeavors to encourage other countries to do their part in the preservation of this freedom and independence. The objective is to support U.S. interests by means of common effort."

 

bwahahahaha

 

Why should that make you giggle. How would YOU suggest doing things?

[Xard]

Well, U.S wants world to be community of "truly free and independent" nations. However what if these countries dont want to work towards "U.S interests" or go against them?

 

It gets even more ironic in following chapters (which I don't feel like typing out) with all the talk about U.S. helping and inserting military in these "independent and free" countries

[SteveThaiBinh]

Our very own Labour government (we love you, Gordon!) has a tendency to lose what information it has - in the post and on trains seem to be the preferred methods. I wonder how the Swedish government plans to lose all this new data.

 

I probably trust the Swedish government not to lose or abuse the information it gets more than I trust the UK or US governments, but that's perhaps because I have a misty-eyed, rose-coloured view of the Scandinavians and their goodness.

[Xard]

What is the problem apart from advocating censorship, torturing, bribery, restricting labour and political parties, unethical acts of violence, traning paramilitary groups etc.?

 

It violates human rights in every possible way.

 

I've only been skim-reading, but I don't see any reference to torture. If you see it, help me out. The 'hasty interrogation' you picked on seemed to revolve around showing a subject maps, and taking them up in a plane. I see they mention the unsettling effect of being in a plane for a groundslogging peasant, but beyond that... Seriously, I'm not trying to be a ****. I don't see it.

 

There's also psychological torture you know

 

 

"Whenever a suspect is apprehended during an operation, a hasty interrogation takes place to gain immediate information that could be of tactical value."

 

In heat of crisis it is hard to evaluate how far to take it. Americans have long-ago gone under torture section in these kind of things during War on terrorism

Pressure from the security forces has persuasive power.

 

In case of El Salvador and such these security forces have used rather...harsh methods of persuasion without U.S officials batting eyelash.

 

"This emergency legislation may include a form of martial law permitting government forces to search without warrant, to detain without bringing formal charges, and to execute other similar actions. "

 

this "other similar actions isn't very specific category don't you think?

 

And destroying area's infrastructure just to fight insurgents is plain terrorism, nothing else.

The template for Iraq today is not Vietnam, with which it has often been compared, but El Salvador, where a right-wing government backed by the United States fought a leftist insurgency in a 12-year war beginning in 1980. The cost was high — more than 70,000 people were killed, most of them civilians, in a country with a population of just six million. Most of the killing and torturing was done by the army and the right-wing death squads affiliated with it. According to an Amnesty International report in 2001, violations committed by the army and associated groups included ‘‘extrajudicial executions, other unlawful killings, ‘disappearances’ and torture. . . . Whole villages were targeted by the armed forces and their inhabitants massacred.’’ As part of President Reagan’s policy of supporting anti-Communist forces, hundreds of millions of dollars in United States aid was funneled to the Salvadoran Army, and a team of 55 Special Forces advisers, led for several years by Jim Steele, trained front-line battalions that were accused of significant human rights abuses.

 

The same article states James Steele and many other former Central American Special Forces "military advisors" have now been appointed at a high level to Iraq.

 

Not very surprising the bit about Steele

 

The document doesn't make DIRECT reference to torture, but as you can see things are quite vague at places. And paper made references to other documents. And judging by what we've seen happening in the world...

Edited June 19, 2008 by Xard

[Walsingham]

I really want to convey how not aggressive I am about this. It's sometimes hard in text.

 

Your point 1, about hasty interrogation. I accept that a hasty interrogation in the field is naturally less safe than one in a controlled environment far away from action. But it doesn't automatically follow that this means torture. Again, see Mackey.

 

The second quote is interesting, in that yes appointing certain officials can be indicative. However, it doesn't automatically follow that they haven't learned from the mistakes, or aren't aware of the changed atmosphere. Look at the way military innovators work, for example the development of the 'big wing' in the RAF. People went both ways based on tehri experience.

[Gorth]

I've only been skim-reading, but I don't see any reference to torture. If you see it, help me out. The 'hasty interrogation' you picked on seemed to revolve around showing a subject maps, and taking them up in a plane.

The psychological torture part is whether they get a parachute (paint 'x' on map for the interrogators) or not before being kicked out of the plane...