What is with The Guardian and their NSFW article pictures on the sidebar?
Yeah that's started to irritate me too.
NSA pays £100m in secret funding for GCHQ
11–20 of 60 posts
Re: NSA pays £100m in secret funding for GCHQ
#12Nobody at Cheltenham is particularly well paid, compared to the private sector at least – a junior analyst might earn £25,000. "We can offer a fantastic mission but we can’t compete with [private sector] salaries," one briefing note lamented.
Yep. That was a big part of why when I talked to a GCHQ recruiter when I was finishing my doctorate that I didn't bother going any further.
Re: NSA pays £100m in secret funding for GCHQ
#13More damning than the headline here is that GCHQ apparently explicitly stated that a major selling point for the partnership is the UK's lax legal regime, which allows them to be "Less constrained by NSA's concerns about compliance."
It's been reported elsewhere that the NSA may uses GCHQ to spy on Americans, as a deliberate run around the fourth amendment. I guess, funding GCHQ makes that worse, as well.
These allegations have been widely reported since the start of the Snowden leaks two months ago and both General Alexander and DNI Clapper have both claimed that they don't "run around" the Fourth Amendment in this fashion.
It's interesting to see the USG contradictions and hypocrisy coming to light in this fashion, especially since their lies are increasingly egregious and continuous.
There is an image[1] of their operations that is especially interesting, and one can interpret it in multiple ways. For example the colors likely represent intelligence reciprocity, but it could also be construed to identify allies and enemies. Since America is yellow then it could represent weak intelligence gathering effectiveness, and it stands to reason that allies likely spy on Americans for us. I wonder how much legal liability that opens up for them? Perhaps they're leery of spying on Americans.
[1] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5c/Boundless...
Re: NSA pays £100m in secret funding for GCHQ
#14The general geopolitical trend seems to be that the US is about to take control over Europe. Slowly, but under the radar of the People.
Maybe we really could all agree on having 1 big merger.
But the idea that "Americope" would then be controlled mainly out of North America is pretty unhealthy/insane.
Re: NSA pays £100m in secret funding for GCHQ
#15The linked article only provides the highlights. A more in-depth article is here: http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/aug/01/gch... As well as discussing the funding and various projects in more detail, it also sheds some light on what life is like for the rank-and-file. It is a world of decoding and cake sales, programming and pub quizzes. Nobody at Cheltenham is particularly well paid, compared to the…
Sweet, so just hang around pubs in Cheltenham till you find the spook pub, then pal up with them, find out who would most likely take a bribe (I don't know, maybe one who plays the puggies[0] a lot would be a good place to start) offer a big wad of cash and boom! you can find out about anything or anyone... Shit, that's probably how the tabloids know who to send PI's after, there must be stuff leaking out of that place :-(
Edit: [0] Slot machines for gambling.
Re: NSA pays £100m in secret funding for GCHQ
#16What scares me further is that The Guardian seem to be the only publication that are reporting on this. I'm a frequent BBC News reader and generally trust in there neutrality. I would not have heard about any of the recent revelations if not for The Guardian. I didn't even know about Tempora until I saw it on a HN comment and looked it up on Wikipedia. Apparently there has been a "D-Notice" to prevent reporting on the matter [1].
Re: NSA pays £100m in secret funding for GCHQ
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you think this is something new in Europe (or at any place on Earth)?
That's not what I think. Corruption is a problem every human being is prone to. I'm talking about the scale of corruption. In this regard, DC is the sickest known example in the western world, I'd say. And now this kind of scale seems about to be extended further.
You haven't really visited Eastern-Europe or any post-Soviet country, have you? :)
Corruption was always high-scale, but usually with low visibility or even lower accountability (as long as you bribe the watchers too). I think the major change is the visibility of these actions, and the expectations around them: people now hope (and not just dream) for better.
Re: NSA pays £100m in secret funding for GCHQ
#18Absolutely disgusting.
>When GCHQ does supply the US with valuable intelligence, the agency boasts about it. In one review, GCHQ boasted that it had supplied "unique contributions" to the NSA during its investigation of the American citizen responsible for an attempted car bomb attack in Times Square, New York City, in 2010.
>No other detail is provided – but it raises the possibility that GCHQ might have been spying on an American living in the US. The NSA is prohibited from doing this by US law.
I'd say that's more than a possibility. That's a reasonable inference. And there's nothing that any of the citizens of our respective western democracies can do about it. Our own governments aren't representing our interests. We can't flee to other governments because they're the ones doing our own government's dirty work. It's corruption all the way down to protect us from a nebulous threat, even though the panopticon presents a far more pervasive and persistent threat than any terrorist could ever dream of, and whose motivations are typically a response to our own foreign policies to begin with. It's a nasty positive feedback loop that I want no part in, but have no substantive say in regardless.
Re: NSA pays £100m in secret funding for GCHQ
#19What is with The Guardian and their NSFW article pictures on the sidebar?
Are you complaining about the breastfeeding picture? In which country are you that this is not safe for your place of employment?
Re: NSA pays £100m in secret funding for GCHQ
#20I suspect similar cooperations are in effect in many countries in Europe. Which would also explain a very compliant reaction in the Snowden case.