Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

spyguy

Trump v. GCHQ

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39300191

'The unusual move by the agency came after White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer cited claims first made on US TV channel Fox News earlier this week.

GCHQ responded by saying the allegations were "nonsense, utterly ridiculous and should be ignored".

Mr Trump has claimed that Trump Tower in New York was under surveillance.

But he has provided no evidence for the claim.'

Now I have no view on this.

I guess the claim is all part of the Trump mental media claim.

However .....

If I was GCHQ and had not spied on Trump then I would just say a simple:  'No. GCHQ have not spied on Trump'

The statement sounds like it was provided some old duffer in the pub, not a GCHQ spokesman.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh joy, it appears the MSM will be continuing with 'Trump The Musical' for the foreseeable future. Marginally more entertaining than their other favourite piece of theatre 'Brexit The Musical'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Should be ignored".

Why ? If they're nonsense they are nonsense. The use of the word "ignore" indicates fear imo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I demand to know why they haven't spied on him. That's what they're supposed to actually do.

Also, shouldn't they have a policy of "we don't ever comment on our activities?" Otherwise you can just keep asking them who they've spied on, and then when they don't answer, or say no comment then you know that's who they spied on.

If i was a journalist I'd now be asking them if they've ever spied on a member of the royal family. I'm sure they will have at some point (even if just by accident because one happens to be in the room of some foreign dignatory that they're keeping an eye on) so how do they answer that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, StainlessSteelCat said:

Indeed, I'd expect it to be part of their job to spy on potential and actual world leaders. 

Or what are we paying them for?

When they brief a government minister are we expecting them to have gleaned all their information purely by reading the online edition of the New York Times?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Frank Hovis said:

When they brief a government minister are we expecting them to have gleaned all their information purely by reading the online edition of the New York Times?

They'd be better educated on HPC OT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who watches the watchers?

Well, the head of the FBI, Facebook founder, and the Pope cover their webcams on their tablets and computers. You just don't know.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, StainlessSteelCat said:

Indeed, I'd expect it to be part of their job to spy on potential and actual world leaders. 

Perhaps they thought that he didn't stand a chance of winning..?

Anyway, the quote was actually that it was ridiculous that they'd responded to US requests to hack DT...  So they've specifically not said that they weren't hacking DT, and, interestingly, not said that they didn't give information on DT that they'd gathered anyway (ie, they didn't hack on request, but did share info when asked).

And, semantically, they've said that it is ridiculous that they wiretapped DT.  Of course it is ridiculous!  No-one actually taps wires these days...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CunningPlan said:

They'd be better educated on HPC OT.

They would!

As another poster said this is my first check for breaking news and also my source for the in depth news.

Not necessarily the posts themselves, bar Chumpus Rex who seems to know everything (compliment rather than sarcasm!), but the sources to which they direct you.

It is a genuine education at times and brings home how woeful and biased is the standard of the BBC news in particular.

My secondary source is Russia Today for the breath of their coverage and that when there are the ham fisted attempts at propaganda they are so obvious that you can filter them out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The UK and the US have an agreement not to spy on one another. Very few people understand how close both countries are in terms of intelligence co-operation. The EU, especially the Germans and French, were particularly angry/jealous of this.

But it is now beginning to emerge that somehow somewhere there was possibility some kind of legal loop-hole agreement put in place, in order to not break the law in each respective country, where the UK spied on things in the US that the US spy agencies were legally unable to do so and, no doubt, something respective going on here in the UK.

That's actually quite a biggie - if true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely, as every call is recorded for later analysis there would have to be special procedures implemented to exempt Trumps' calls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GCHQ protesting too much. 

They would never admit to it anyway. I'm sure there is lots of stuff going on that they will officially deny even though it is taking place.

They are having a laugh if they expect anyone to believe them now. Just ask Snowden, who considers GCHQ to be almost more dangerous than the NSA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Masked Tulip said:

But it is now beginning to emerge that somehow somewhere there was possibility some kind of legal loop-hole agreement put in place, in order to not break the law in each respective country, where the UK spied on things in the US that the US spy agencies were legally unable to do so and, no doubt, something respective going on here in the UK.

That's actually quite a biggie - if true.

I can't quote anything but I thought that was accepted fact. I certainly think it but I can't tell you how I got to that conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Masked Tulip said:

The UK and the US have an agreement not to spy on one another. Very few people understand how close both countries are in terms of intelligence co-operation. The EU, especially the Germans and French, were particularly angry/jealous of this.

But it is now beginning to emerge that somehow somewhere there was possibility some kind of legal loop-hole agreement put in place, in order to not break the law in each respective country, where the UK spied on things in the US that the US spy agencies were legally unable to do so and, no doubt, something respective going on here in the UK.

That's actually quite a biggie - if true.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes#Domestic_espionage_sharing_controversy

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SpectrumFX said:

I demand to know why they haven't spied on him. That's what they're supposed to actually do.

Also, shouldn't they have a policy of "we don't ever comment on our activities?" Otherwise you can just keep asking them who they've spied on, and then when they don't answer, or say no comment then you know that's who they spied on.

If i was a journalist I'd now be asking them if they've ever spied on a member of the royal family. I'm sure they will have at some point (even if just by accident because one happens to be in the room of some foreign dignatory that they're keeping an eye on) so how do they answer that?


:-D
+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps the subtext of this is that GCHQ are actively monitoring Russian communications and high value individuals. Trump has had a great deal of communication with Russia and these conversations will therefore have been picked up. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, The Masked Tulip said:

The UK and the US have an agreement not to spy on one another. Very few people understand how close both countries are in terms of intelligence co-operation. The EU, especially the Germans and French, were particularly angry/jealous of this.

But it is now beginning to emerge that somehow somewhere there was possibility some kind of legal loop-hole agreement put in place, in order to not break the law in each respective country, where the UK spied on things in the US that the US spy agencies were legally unable to do so and, no doubt, something respective going on here in the UK.

That's actually quite a biggie - if true.

It was mentioned in the Snowden leaks, which apparently not many people know about, or choose to ignore, hence the feigned reactions to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, InlikeFlynn said:

Perhaps the subtext of this is that GCHQ are actively monitoring Russian communications and high value individuals. Trump has had a great deal of communication with Russia and these conversations will therefore have been picked up. 

 

 

 

 

You win today's "Vladimir's Law" proclamation :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, InlikeFlynn said:

Perhaps the subtext of this is that GCHQ are actively monitoring Russian communications and high value individuals. Trump has had a great deal of communication with Russia and these conversations will therefore have been picked up. 

lol. If GCHQ think any of these 'high value individuals' or other Russia figures are stupid enough to say anything useful on a phone/computer/public place they are having a laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, InlikeFlynn said:

Perhaps the subtext of this is that GCHQ are actively monitoring Russian communications and high value individuals. Trump has had a great deal of communication with Russia and these conversations will therefore have been picked up. 

Presumably they will also have picked up the frequent contact between Hillary's team and the Russian Ambassador and other Russian Government officials as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hotairmail said:

A news item creates equal and opposite narratives - the western mainstream one 

... and the non-Western mainstream one.

Those in the West would very much like the world to return to the days before the internet took off - where they had a captive audience and total narrative control. Sadly (for them), those days are long gone.

And I'm not a Russian stooge or a stooge of any other country. I merely support any position that fights the current neocon world order. Which is why I am generally pro-Trump (the alternative was Clinton who is far worse). In several speeches Trump explicitly stated that he understood that the age of any American-lead world order. It remains to be seen whether he will stick to that. As for Russia, it is the largest country openly challenging the world order (Putin refuses to bend the knee to the US), and this is why the neocons and their stooge nations have been trying to destroy it for the last 10 years. China understands that if Russia falls, then it will be next - hence the Russia/China strategic relationship.

If a UK politician wants to come along with sensible ideas and a balanced, pragmatic view of the world I'll gladly support them as well. I've yet to see one (apart from Farage). For a start, we could make a habit of telling the US to sod off when it next tells us what to do or suggests that we bomb some peasants in the middle of nowhere.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, 200p said:

Who watches the watchers?

Well, the head of the FBI, Facebook founder, and the Pope cover their webcams on their tablets and computers. You just don't know.

 

 

I think Juvenal had it covered: "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Next General Election   93 members have voted

    1. 1. When do you predict the next general election will be held?


      • 2019
      • 2020
      • 2021
      • 2022

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.