Report: Britain Has a Secret Middle East Web Surveillance Base

wiredmikey writes "Britain is running a secret Internet surveillance station in the Middle East, according to a recent report citing the latest leaked documents obtained by fugitive US security contractor Edward Snowden. The Independent newspaper said it was not disclosing the country where the base is located, but said the facility can intercept emails, telephone calls and web traffic for the United States and other intelligence agencies and taps into underwater fibre-optic cables in the region, the newspaper said. The Independent did not disclose how it obtained the details from the Snowden files."

Comments

Yes, and?

[Lawrence_Bird]

that is what they are supposed to be doing right? Gathering intel? The problem is when they do it against their own citizens.

Re:Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

Roses are red,
grass is greener.

When I read Slashdot,
I play with my weiner.

Re:Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is when they do it against everyone with no aim but to collect. And that that data is used later on not just for people linked to terrorists, but harassment of simple citizens, economic espionage, personal vendettas by the ones in power to get some advantages, masturbation, ...

Just like CCTV in London. Meant to prevent crime, can never achieve that (violent crimes is not affected by the presence of cameras because people don't think in that moment, other crime shifts to places without cameras). Still they have it now and use it for harassing people who litter, make graffiti, look odd, masturbation, etc.

No thank you.

Re:Yes, and?

[msobkow]

Ah, but you're missing the key point on how the "game" is played.

The GCHQ in the UK isn't allowed to spy on UK citizens, so they spy on the rest of the EU's citizens, and apparently on the Middle East.

The NSA isn't allowed to spy on US citizens, so they spy on Canadians and others.

The Canadian spy agency isn't allowed to spy on Canadians, so it spies on Americans and others.

Australia and New Zealand spy on anyone close to their networks as well.

Even the Germans are into spying.

Then after everyone has spied on the "foreigners" who aren't protected by each nation's laws, they get together, exchange their data, and end up with the intel on their own citizens, all while claiming "but we don't spy on our own citizens."

Re:Yes, and?

[Roger W Moore]

Exactly - I don't understand why this is either surprising. In fact my only concern is that a national paper thinks that it should publish such details. Having a foreign intelligence base in the heart of the region from where many of the terrorists come from sounds like an very sensible, reasonable thing. It's the detaining non-terrorist suspects under terrorism laws and spying on their own citizens and allies alike that is the concerning part. It appears that the press seems to have lost sight of this. Although I expect it may be somewhat related to the farce of destroying their UK-based disks and laptops.

Re:Yes, and?

[noh8rz10]

Flag on the play - I thought snowden was all about us NSA and civil liberties. This is Chelsea manning style spray and pray - indiscriminate release

Re:Yes, and?

[WillAffleckUW]

Technically, the CSIS spies don't spy on anyone, they just have their passports counterfeited by the other agencies, but, other than that, you are correct.

The Germans aren't spying. They are "observing".

Just like the Chinese, who are spying and bribing and all the other things you think they're not doing but are.

Re: Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

Planted information to discredit Snowden or using Snowden's name to cover for another leaker?

Re:Yes, and?

[AHuxley]

The problem with the UK and its secret surveillance stations is in the political power it gives the host country.
Land, power, guards, a local cover story was once all post colonial joy or NATO like anti Soviet deals, training and some basic intel sharing.
eg Cold war Sweden got some airborne elint but no UK/US like sharing/resources.
The problem with the local "citizens" is once the locals find out the steps the local rulers/politicians/military have to take to keep the secret again.
Britain's Embassy in Peking was looted by "protesters" in 1967 and lost its Rockex cypher equipment.
Iran, Ethiopia and Turkey (via TPLA and TPLF) where often at issue to further UK/US sites in the ~1960's (and other sites later during the Cold War).
ie the Cld War offered sigint facilities extreme secrecy.
Now nations offer other types of sites just to show how thankful they are:
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cia-black-sites-lithuania/story?id=9400744
http://www.thejournal.ie/british-papers-reveal-interrogation-centre-in-derry-1023719-Aug2013/
"Secret British papers reveal secret 1970s interrogation centre in Derry"
Sites have many uses and can become news again years later. "subject to deep interrogation under the five techniques system the European Commission has called ‘torture’"

Re:Yes, and?

[chill]

Snowden gave the trove of files to The Guardian at least. The specific leaks, after the initial ones, are decided by Glenn Greenwald and not Snowden.

Whether Greenwald gave some stuff to the Independent or Snowden did that earlier is unknown.

But my guess would be the whole episode of the UK Gov't detaining Mr. Miranda and forcing The Guarding to shred some systems seriously pissed off the British Press. Releasing UK-specific material is most likely payback. Spreading it around to other papers is most likely a signal that "threaten the Guardian with prior restraint, you better be ready to shut down every paper in the UK".

GCHQ and Whitehall fucked up royally with that and they are now going to pay for threatening a major newspaper.

Just a guess, mind you.

Re:Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

Flag on the play -

Why ?

Does the UK need to spy on the middle east ?

The British Empire of the past is OVER. The UK
is just a formerly great power which is sinking
into oblivion by its own greed, incompetence,
arrogance, sense of entitlement, and stupidity.

The glory days of the UK are in the 19th and 20th
centuries. Now, all the UK government does is act
like an eager lap dog for the bully US government.
It's truly pathetic if you observe with any amount of
objectivity.

FYI : I am not affiliated with any religious group. I am not
interested in some asshole telling me what I should believe.
What I believe is based solely on hard evidence, and the evidence
points to the UK flailing about in a grotesque pretense of
still being a great power. It's embarrassing yet hilarious at the same
time.

Re:Yes, and?

[Charliemopps]

that is what they are supposed to be doing right? Gathering intel? The problem is when they do it against their own citizens.

Fuck that. Let's not spy on anyone's residential phone or internet traffic.

Re:Yes, and?

[Above]

I'm thinking this may well be a middle finger aimed at the political types in the UK who had Greenwald's partner detained. It's his way of saying, this may have been about civil liberties and constitutional protections for your own citizens, but if you're going to mess with people on our side we can mess with people on your side too. A shot across their bow to give them some idea of the other information he has that he can chose to publish about, or keep secret.

Re:Yes, and?

[LifesABeach]

It ain't a secret anymore to those of us that don't care.

I think I heard from somewhere that the president is getting his daily secret intelligence report from WikiLeaks; it's more accurate.

Re:Yes, and?

[greg_barton]

Which is why we need a world government.

No more "foreigners."

Re:Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

Having a foreign intelligence base in the heart of the region from where many of the terrorists come from sounds like an very sensible, reasonable thing.

Almost as reasonable as the UK ending its meddling in other countries which
are no longer its "territories".

Re:Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

You may be right. From the linked article....

"But there are fears in Government that Mr Greenwald – who still has access to the files – could attempt to release damaging information.

He said after the arrest of Mr Miranda: “I will be far more aggressive in my reporting from now. I am going to publish many more documents. I have many more documents on England’s spy system. I think they will be sorry for what they did.”"

Re:Yes, and?

[FuzzNugget]

Right, they all spy on each other's citizens then exchange data, which amounts to exactly the same thing. Honoring the letter and shitting on the spirit seems to a trend these days.

And by the NSA's own logic, exchanging data is "two or three degrees of separation," which apparently should make them equally liable. Not that government hypocrisy surprises me in the least.

Re:Yes, and?

[lightknight]

Oh, I think you'll find we have one of those. It's just that everyone disagrees about who is running it: Aliens, the Devil, God, the Jews, the Nazis, the British Monarchy, the Templars, the Roman Catholics, the Free Masons, the UN, the US, the USSR, the Bankers, the Illuminati, an AI, etc.

Tell you what. Everyone get together, and decide who is, and isn't running this Universe, and when you all agree on the same people (and I want this in writing), come and find me; I'll be busy getting high, and trying to accomplish some pleasantly futile task...futile because of what I am, and my own personal failings, and perhaps what I have set out to do, not because I'm high.

Re:Yes, and?

[QRDeNameland]

Then after everyone has spied on the "foreigners" who aren't protected by each nation's laws, they get together, exchange their data, and end up with the intel on their own citizens, all while claiming "but we don't spy on our own citizens."

When pundits refer to the USA as the dominant global superpower, I think they really mean the United Security Agencies.

Re:Yes, and?

[lightknight]

Nonsense. Let's spy on people, but only if they're female, between the ages of consent and too ripe, and only if it's on a Friday. And have it broadcast from Mulder.FBI.gov...for 'National Security' purposes...these are dangerous times, and we need to take extra special precautions that our women are not harmed during them...which is why they need to be placed under surveillance. As it stands, there are plenty of adolescent males at home who, during this time of sequestering, are willing to do their patriotic duty to their country, and offer their ocular services to their homeland, free of charge, so long as we are willing to provide them with an ample supply of tissues and lotion.

Re:Yes, and?

[six025]

Whether Greenwald gave some stuff to the Independent or Snowden did that earlier is unknown.

But my guess would be the whole episode of the UK Gov't detaining Mr. Miranda and forcing The Guarding to shred some systems seriously pissed off the British Press. Releasing UK-specific material is most likely payback. Spreading it around to other papers is most likely a signal that "threaten the Guardian with prior restraint, you better be ready to shut down every paper in the UK".

GCHQ and Whitehall fucked up royally with that and they are now going to pay for threatening a major newspaper.

Just a guess, mind you.

Rather telling is that a) the story appears in the Independent and b) article makes no reference as to the source of the allegations, other than stating that the information was found in the documents leaked by Edward Snowden:

Information about the project was contained in 50,000 GCHQ documents that Mr Snowden downloaded during 2012. Many of them came from an internal Wikipedia-style information site called GC-Wiki. Unlike the public Wikipedia, GCHQ’s wiki was generally classified Top Secret or above.

The disclosure comes as the Metropolitan Police announced it was launching a terrorism investigation into material found on the computer of David Miranda, the Brazilian partner of The Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald – who is at the centre of the Snowden controversy.

Prior to this story most UK articles appeared in the Guardian and clearly stated that Glenn Greewald provided the information. The game has changed, and I think it is going to get a whole lot uglier from here.

Peace,
Andy.

Re:Yes, and?

[six025]

And I should add: huge kudos to the Independent for having the balls to stand up and keep reporting in the face of what appears to be a War on Journalism.

Peace,
Andy.

Re:Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly, and where does someone who discloses this kind of revelation get their education from? Who is this information helping? WTF?

Re:Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

How does that really get around the restriction against spying on your own citizens? It seems pretty obvious that the collection and analysis of data on citizens is what constitutes the spying. Getting it from another country's spying apparatus is just the same as getting it from any other source. If the restriction is that easy to circumvent, why not just hire every employee as a contractor and claim that they're doing the spying?

Re:Yes, and?

[Immerman]

Ugh. What say we figure out how to keep a national government from sliding into tyranny for more than a couple centuries or so before we even discuss a world government? I'd hate to think how this would play out if instead of the US of A it was the US of Earth. Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide.

There's absolutely no reason we couldn't get the same effect via international treaty. We did it with war crimes. We did it with human rights. We could do it with individual privacy. Heck, we could even do it with international corporate tax avoidance if most politicians weren't already on the corporate payroll.

Re:Yes, and?

[msobkow]

I believe the Canadian surveillance division is actually CSEC. Here's a recent article about them http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Opposition+calls+halt+agency+activities+directed/8820518/story.html

CSIS is more akin to the CIA than the NSA.

Re:Yes, and?

[msobkow]

You mean like the US paying GCHQ?

Re: Yes, and?

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Supposed to be doing?

Yes, if by that you mean running an evil empire built on pillage and oppression.

BTW: When it's "middle east" and they don't mention the country? It's always Israel.

Re:Yes, and?

[icebike]

But my guess would be the whole episode of the UK Gov't detaining Mr. Miranda and forcing The Guarding to shred some systems seriously pissed off the British Press. Releasing UK-specific material is most likely payback. Spreading it around to other papers is most likely a signal that "threaten the Guardian with prior restraint, you better be ready to shut down every paper in the UK". GCHQ and Whitehall fucked up royally with that and they are now going to pay for threatening a major newspaper.

Just a guess, mind you.

Yeah, and it wouldn't bee too hard to figure out where this secret location is either.
You could just pick likely places from here: http://www.telegeography.com/telecom-resources/submarine-cable-landing-directory/
Gibraltar would be a good guess.

Re:Yes, and?

[icebike]

Which is why we need a world government.

No more "foreigners."

On the off chance your tongue is not firmly in your cheek...

If you think we have trouble controlling our own governments how successful would be be
controlling a world government which would quickly become an untouchable permanent ruling class?

You are Mad Sir, simply Mad.

Re:Yes, and?

[greg_barton]

It's so crazy it just might work.

Re:Yes, and?

[PopeRatzo]

The problem is when they do it against their own citizens.

We have a special innovation here in the US, where the court that makes decisions about warrants and surveillance on American citizens on US soil is called the "Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court".

When the government tells you, "Don't worry, we're only looking for those foreign terrorists, that's when you need to get up and look behind you to make sure some government contractor hasn't crawled up your ass.

That's the other innovation: the surveillance is done by private corporations. This way, any information that's collected can also help out their corporate clients. It's a two-fer! "Win-win" as they say.

Re:Yes, and?

[epine]

which amounts to exactly the same thing

For a glib value of "same thing". I understand the Americans and the British are pretty tight, but I bet there's friction at every other point of exchange, even if it's just the petty little-brother/big-brother dynamic between Canada and the US.

When you're in the thought-crime business, all boundaries are porous. The correct question to the NSA is this: Do you access information on American citizens who have not yet committed a crime? And the obvious answer is: "Of course we do! Isn't the whole point of anti-terrorism to catch terrorists before their crimes are committed?" There's your thoughtcrime mandate signed, sealed and delivered.

The net immediately widens to include anyone with a legitimate or perceived beef with any social institution, and access to a car, an internet connection, or a hardware store.

Re:Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, I'm afraid this leak is the type that gets people killed.

Re:Yes, and?

[grcumb]

Yeah, and it wouldn't bee too hard to figure out where this secret location is either. You could just pick likely places from here: http://www.telegeography.com/telecom-resources/submarine-cable-landing-directory/ Gibraltar would be a good guess.

For the more visually inclined, a graphical map.

And based on that, I'll give dollars to doughnuts that it's Egypt. Virtually all traffic between Europe and Asia transits through the Suez canal.

Re:Yes, and?

[grcumb]

Why ?

Does the UK need to spy on the middle east ?

The British Empire of the past is OVER. The UK is just a formerly great power which is sinking into oblivion by its own greed, incompetence, arrogance, sense of entitlement, and stupidity.

Er, the UK is home to one of the most important financial centres on the planet. It's got a huge (commercial and strategic) incentive to know what other countries are doing. And it's not just spying on the Middle East - it's spying in the Middle East on all the Europe-Asia traffic that passes through the Suez Canal. Which is pretty much all of the Europe-Asia traffic there is (Russia excepted).

And you can rest assured that at least some of the US$100 million that the NSA gives GCHQ is being used to maintain these facilities. Draw what conclusions you like.

Re:Yes, and?

[icebike]

But why set up your shop in an unstable country lime Egypt, when following your own map shows that the bulk of those cables continue on to Palermo and then Gibraltar, then to the rest of Europe.

Re:Yes, and?

[meta-monkey]

Ah ha! I've got you now greenskin! I can tell by your deliberate omission that you, lightknight, must be one of our true overlords, the Lizard Men from the Hollow Earth!

Re:Yes, and?

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

While we sit and some wonder on the provenance of the story, keep in mind the US and UK already know if it's true or not and are shitting bricks even more or not.

Re:Yes, and?

[grcumb]

But why set up your shop in an unstable country lime Egypt, when following your own map shows that the bulk of those cables continue on to Palermo and then Gibraltar, then to the rest of Europe.

Because they want to get the stuff that's bound for your Good Friend [sic] France, and because they're not 'setting up shop', they've been there since the early 19th Century. This is just a continuation of their strategic look-in on the canal and the global traffic that passes through it. Oh, and Gibraltar's not in the Middle East. :-)

... But none of this is to say they don't have similar facilities in Gibraltar.

Re:Yes, and?

[G3ckoG33k]

Chelsea is indiscriminate? No, just preparing for a new mating season.

Re:Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, and it wouldn't bee too hard to figure out where this secret location is either.
You could just pick likely places from here: http://www.telegeography.com/telecom-resources/submarine-cable-landing-directory/
Gibraltar would be a good guess.

Not only is Gibraltar not in the Middle East, but it's also a British territory so it is considered part of Britain. If that was the case the headline would be a lot less interesting: "British running secret surveillance base in Great Britain."

Re:Yes, and?

[Chrisq]

Why ?

Does the UK need to spy on the middle east ?

.

Of course it does. We have a problem with Muslim terrorists as much as any other country

Re:Yes, and?

[golden age villain]

Gibraltar would almost for sure not be referred to as "in the Middle East".

Re:Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

We have one, it's called Power and measured in Money. You aren't even Capital, at best you're Lube.

Or did you commandeer a trillion Dollars last year? That would make you Capital for use by the Power. Millionaires need not apply.

A world government demands and requires everybody to be a foreigner, not only to their nation and background and culture but to their friends and families and children and even to themselves and their own thoughts and feelings. Estrangement facilitates Power, forever dividing and conquering and trapping people into thinking that uniting behind a "voice" of ideology or some such would change things.

Laugh.

Laugh right now if you know what is good for you.

A lot of people already feel that way and far more simply don't realize because they perceive it as normality or are preoccupied with just about anything else or are otherwise too comatose.

When you don't want to hurt you recoil. Instinct, physical reactions made mental.

As for the pen... the pen is mightier than the sword only when physically used for torture, everything else is saccharine make-believe.

Re:Yes, and?

[Joining Yet Again]

Er, the UK is home to one of the most important financial centres on the planet.

So, like the guy said - formerly great.

Re:Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't need drugs to be the way you are :)

Otherwise I fully subscribe to your point of view, you describe me to a dot (and that makes the first sentence far more ambiguous doesn't it?).

Re:Yes, and?

[Vintermann]

You have bigger problems with car fatalities, much as any other country.

Governments don't hate terrorism for moral reasons. It's not because it's violence, or innocents die. No, the great powers tolerate and use violence themselves that is equally bad or worse.

The reason is that it threatens their power to do as they please, since it messes with public opinion in unpredictable ways.

Re:Yes, and?

[Vintermann]

The UK is a region where many terrorists come from, Lots of other people who can potentially cause trouble, too.

This isn't like spying on dictators or the Soviet Union. This is mass surveillance of the citizens of a state. The privacy of regular citizens is not respected. Unless you believe in some sort of inherent racial superiority or something, a regular citizen is equally entitled to privacy whether he was born in the UK or in Egypt.

Given that, could you please send me your mail password? No need to be impolite about it, after all.

Re:Yes, and?

[Chrisq]

You have bigger problems with car fatalities, much as any other country.

But the stated intent of the Muslims is to destroy our society. If unchecked they certainly will. Of course money should be spent on road safety too, but there is no campaign by drivers to destroy our civilisation.

Re:Yes, and?

[icebike]

It is in the perfect place to moniter the middle east. The primary fiber optic cables run through that area directly to India. The actual headline in TFA mentioned a middle east web monitoring base using that exact phrase. Doesn't actually say it's located in any specific place.

Re:Yes, and?

[minus9]

Finance has no relevance any more. What??

Re:Yes, and?

[Joining Yet Again]

We're talking about greatness, not relevance, aren't we?

The British empire was full of asshattery, but also a great deal of philosophical, scientific, technological and practical productivity.

Modern Britain is a Politburo.

Re:Yes, and?

[rapiddescent]

For the more visually inclined, a graphical map.

And based on that, I'll give dollars to doughnuts that it's Egypt. Virtually all traffic between Europe and Asia transits through the Suez canal.

I'd agree with this analysis because there were some massive interuptions with middle eastern internet comms when the SEA-ME-WE_4 cable was apparently snagged by ships at anchor of Alexandria. Interestingly, Egypt actually arrested 3 men for cutting though cable off Alexandria in March this year. makes you wonder what they were actually doing.

Re:Yes, and?

[AmiMoJo]

As in, hardly at all. Spying on Muslim countries just encourages them anyway.

Re:Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

But the stated intent of the Muslims is to destroy our society.

Oh. I thought that was the stated intent of the terrorists. Sorry, my bad.

Re:Yes, and?

[SalafranceUnderhill]

Let me know when you've achieved your goals and I'll join you.

Re:Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

not spying on them will not make them hate us less.
not bombing them either.
they hate us, period, and doing good or bad to them will never change that.

Re:Yes, and?

[Eunuchswear]

And I should add: huge kudos to the Independent for having the balls to stand up and keep reporting in the face of what appears to be a War on Journalism.

Bwahahaha. It seems the "Independent" got its information from the UK government in an attempt to smear Snowden and Greenwald.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/23/uk-government-independent-military-base

Re:Yes, and?

[anagama]

You know what is confusing about the Verizon order (confusing if you take government organizations at face value)?

The ONLY phone call information Verizon is NOT required to turn over to the NSA, are calls that start and end outside the US. If the call is wholly inside the US (including local calls), ends in the US, or starts in the US, Verizon must turn it over to the NSA. Interesting order from the FOREIGN Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Page 2, starting at line 5
http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/jun/06/verizon-telephone-data-court-order

Re:Yes, and?

[Vintermann]

It isn't even that. At the very worst, it's creating a pan-islamic state elsewhere. More commonly, it's something like "get your soldiers out of our country!"

But it could be that Chrisq thinks having a strong military prescence in foreign countries is an essential part of his "civilization". In a sense, it's even true.

Re:Yes, and?

[MCSEBear]

Both Greenwald and Snowden have publicly denied giving any documents to the Independent.

I wonder what large secretive organizations might have an interest in making Snowden and Greenwald look like dangerous leakers to people who haven't previously been abusing their power to spy on the innocent and lying to the public about it?

Re:Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

you better be ready to shut down every paper in the UK

Your proposal is acceptable.

Re:Yes, and?

[atfrase]

Snowden gave the trove of files to The Guardian at least. The specific leaks, after the initial ones, are decided by Glenn Greenwald and not Snowden.

Whether Greenwald gave some stuff to the Independent or Snowden did that earlier is unknown.

No, it is known, straight from both Snowden and Greenwald themselves: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/23/uk-government-independent-military-base

They deny giving any information to the Independent. Since they are not the source, as the Independent claims, they further surmise that the timing and nature of this particular leak make it plausible that the UK intelligence agency did it intentionally, in order to justify even harsher "anti-terrorism" and "anti-leaker" laws and powers.

Re:Yes, and?

[chill]

Yeah, I just recently saw that. And the Guardian has now partnered with The New York Times to get some protection under the U.S. First Amendment.

This is just going to get more and more interesting.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/aug/23/guardian-news-york-times-partnership

Re: Yes, and?

[Anonymous Coward]

Details do matter

So where did the initial publication based on any of the leaked documents initially occur? Was it the NYT? And why was that?

How much usefullness in doing one RTFA and then doing broad speculation. Well, if you are my shill or my useful idiot then okay.

Re:Yes, and?

[Occams]

"The problem is when they do it against their own citizens." No. The real problem here problem is when they operate in another country against the citizens of that country. No government should stand for that, so by revealing it, Snowden could have caused the Arab government to be exposed to its citixens and the Brits to be kicked out. Now doubt there is an intel sharing agreement between the US and UK on this traffic, so we lose too..

Re:Yes, and?

[computererds]

Guesses in the previous post do not represent the intentions of the poster, or any knowledge of the intentions of others the poster may or may not know..

Any resemblance that the guesses may bear to the future events involving the GCHQ & Whitehall, either directly or indirectly, are purely coincidental..

Snowden gave the trove of files to The Guardian at least. The specific leaks, after the initial ones, are decided by Glenn Greenwald and not Snowden.

Whether Greenwald gave some stuff to the Independent or Snowden did that earlier is unknown.

But my guess would be the whole episode of the UK Gov't detaining Mr. Miranda and forcing The Guarding to shred some systems seriously pissed off the British Press. Releasing UK-specific material is most likely payback. Spreading it around to other papers is most likely a signal that "threaten the Guardian with prior restraint, you better be ready to shut down every paper in the UK".

GCHQ and Whitehall fucked up royally with that and they are now going to pay for threatening a major newspaper.

Just a guess, mind you.

Re:Yes, and?

[Desty]

that is what they are supposed to be doing right? Gathering intel? The problem is when they do it against their own citizens.

Why is it wrong to completely invade the privacy of their own innocent citizens, but not innocent civilians from other countries? I don't see why it's okay to spy on a 12 year old schoolgirl's email if she's from Egypt, but not okay if she's from the UK (or the USA, or whatever country is doing the mass spying).

Just because their job is "gathering intel" does not automatically justify any method of doing so. The job of the police is to prevent crime, so do you think it would be okay for them to arrest everyone in the country and put them in (safe) solitary confinement? No, of course not.

Re:Yes, and?

[RockDoctor]

Of course it does. We have a problem with Muslim terrorists as much as any other country

But we're perfectly capable of growing our own Muslim terrorists without importing dirty little foreign Muslim terrorists. We've even got a valuable pool of non-dark-skinned Muslim terrorists with valid passports indicating them to be from thousand-year British-resident families.

Perhaps we should start to brand people all people with their religious affiliation in the middle of their foreheads? Multiple-branding for people who can't keep their mind made up. Might as well do visiting tourists while we're at it. And definitely for the under-5s.

Good

[Anonymous Coward]

If there is any group of people constantly on the edge of going on killing sprees on civilians, it's the muslims. Best to keep a keen eye on them.

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

If there is any group of people constantly on the edge of going on killing sprees on civilians, it's the muslims.

You have conveniently overlooked the Israelis and the US, with respect to
killings of civilians. The facts indicate that the two aforementioned parties
certainly deserve to be counted as contenders in these matters.

Re:Good

[lightknight]

Well, it takes some talent to get them there. First you need to starve them a bit. Then you need to eradicate all of the moderate / peaceful imams. Then you need to repress the youth, and make them feel trapped. Then you need to make them feel that violence is the only answer to solving their lifestyle problems.

Sure, it takes a large investment in that kind of control / behavioral modification, but it has worked wonders on various indigenous populations, no matter which religion they choose to identify with.

I mean, let's be honest, a fat and happy populace is not a populace which is going to attack anyone. You need to lie to them, cheat them, steal from them, every single day, from every angle, so they feel that even their emotions are on loan from you; that's when you know you have them, when they will altruistically damage themselves to be just like the false image of you. You need to remove that innermost sense of peace that humans are born with, and make them uneasy to be alone with themselves.

I hope you get the dripping sarcasm in the above statements.

Re:Good

[gmuslera]

And knowing who exactly they are put your government in position to give them the right push so they act. The next thing you know is that their democratically elected government got overthrown and a bunch of puppets rule there. Probably that happened in Egypt, is happening in Syria, and happened in most of the Arab Spring countries.

There is no better prediction of the future than the one that you make it happen.

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

If you like them so much why don't you move there? Lets see how long you last before they feature your decapitation in a grainy youtube video.

You can apologize for them all you want, but the current truth of the situation cannot be ignored. The world would be better off if the entire region were turned into glass.

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

> The facts

Please feel free to inform us about all of the terrific sources of unbiased aggregated (not anecdotal, please) information which you use for your statements. One of the few things which consoles me about the probable long-term death of personal privacy is the possibility that it might also enable disinterested third parties to collect unbiased information about these kinds of incidents, as opposed to the current media trend of just picking one or the other side's not necessarily accurate reporting.

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

Sarcasm indeed. Considering muslims are the champions at killing other muslims I sure hope so. During their "holy" month this year they killed over a thousand of "their own": blew them up, hanged them publicly, shot them, cut their throats, the usual muslim behaviour. During the same period of time across the whole world there were two similarly violent incidents not related to islam although one was a reaction to islam (many buddhists are fed up with islam in Sri Lanka, Burma, and Thailand). The figures speak volumes.

I would be fine with that except I'm not fine with them doing the same where I live or against people in the muslim world who do not believe in such religious warfare or who at the very least don't try to hide their violence behind the concept of God or Man-as-God (dictators).

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

During their "holy" month this year they killed over a thousand of "their own": blew them up, hanged them publicly, shot them, cut their throats, the usual muslim behaviour. During the same period of time across the whole world there were two similarly violent incidents not related to islam although one was a reaction to islam (many buddhists are fed up with islam in Sri Lanka, Burma, and Thailand). The figures speak volumes.

Ramadan Bombathon 2013

Jihad Attacks: 310
Countries: 19
Religions targeted: 5
Dead Bodies: 1651
Critically Injured: 3048

For comparison, the Ku Klux Klan has killed about 2,000 people in its entire 150-year history.. Islamic extremists killed close to that number in one month. If Islamic extremism is not a threat and nothing to worry about, then the KKK and white supremacy are certainly not a threat and nothing to worry about.

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

You are a fucking anti-semite, Israel is protecting herself against a pack of subhumans who live on the blood of jews!

Well..

[Ginger_Chris]

As a British citizen, I'm so used to assuming that the government is intercepting every piece of electronic communication, I get really confused that other countries are annoyed they get spied on. Do these other people actually trust their governments? Because that's weird.

Re:Well..

[FixedDice]

British..US...It really makes no difference. Everything is alright as long as you smile and nod. The last thing that anyone would want to do is anger the powers that be. Miranda is a good example of how policies against terrorism can be used against the people for unjust causes.

Re:Well..

[c0lo]

As a British citizen, I'm so used to assuming that the government is intercepting every piece of electronic communication,

As one that lived more than half of his life in one of those European countries in the communist block, I am afraid that you are properly fucked already.
If this persist for longer (say 15-20 years... it only takes one generation of used to, everybody will be teaching it to their children!), the society you'll be living would show the same weird behaviour of its people as during the secret police in communist countries: use of paraphrases when speaking, carefully planning/doing your everyday actions so that they don't appear to have any element of verboten, every neighbour... heck even members of you family... may be turning you to the authorities.
Walk only a little in the past and you'll find Gestapo as another example.

My point is: stop being just so used to... and do something if you don't want there

Re:Well..

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes we do. Our legislation concerning officials is very different from yours from the very basic assumptions and to think of it that we are in the same EU. Then again we don't have the problem of Irish and Scottish freedom fighters because our minorities are treated with respect. Oh shit, I can forget that holiday in London.
Of course, we are also annoyed because your government is likely feeding their pals in the private sector competitive intelligence. Every British citizen and corporation should be annoyed by the possibility of such free market distorting corruption. Every nation which practices active, meaning offensive, foreign intelligence gathering suffers from the same problem, though.

Re:Well..

[lightknight]

Actually, there may have been people in the US for Big Government who really did believe that their government, if given these kinds of widespread powers, would never abuse them. They've been stoically making the arguments for years at this point, jumping on everyone about how the government can be totally trusted, and how any distrust of a government (brought on by reading just about any history book) was a sign of paranoid schizophrenia.

When they heard that the NSA was intercepting every piece of electronic data flowing through the US, many of them didn't want to believe it. They still don't...

Re:Well..

[Anonymous Coward]

People like you have the government you deserve. Just because they can monitor you doesn't means you should help them. If they do it illegally they can at least be punished in the future if you stupid brits get your heads out of your asses and fight back. But if it's legal they will walk free.

Re:Well..

[Anonymous Coward]

If this persist for longer (say 15-20 years... it only takes one generation of used to, everybody will be teaching it to their children!), the society you'll be living would show the same weird behaviour of its people as during the secret police in communist countries: use of paraphrases when speaking, carefully planning/doing your everyday actions so that they don't appear to have any element of verboten, every neighbour... heck even members of you family... may be turning you to the authorities.

Well normally I would be with you on this sentiment, you are generally correct but you don't me or sadly my less thoughtful United States of American counter parts very well. We basically bask in giving someone official the middle finger, I seriously doubt any secret police will do well here. There's a reason the world hates us and it's because we've basically told it and everyone in charge of it to go fuck itself for many years.

Hell we leak all your secrets and tell our parents and the government we want to be a lady in the same day without flinching to 30 years in prison? Sigh.

We've paid the price both ways so who can you blame. Either way I seriously worry very little about Jon Doe next door ratting me out, they would have years ago already, and we all know technologically no place is safe now so my only advice is be a polite loving contributing part of society and if it turns on you, you don't want any part of it anyway. Might as well gang cut my dick off and get gang banged in prison for helping people.

Re:Well..

[c0lo]

If this persist for longer (say 15-20 years... it only takes one generation of used to, everybody will be teaching it to their children!), the society you'll be living would show the same weird behaviour of its people as during the secret police in communist countries: use of paraphrases when speaking, carefully planning/doing your everyday actions so that they don't appear to have any element of verboten, every neighbour... heck even members of you family... may be turning you to the authorities.

Well normally I would be with you on this sentiment, you are generally correct but you don't me or sadly my less thoughtful United States of American counter parts very well. We basically bask in giving someone official the middle finger, I seriously doubt any secret police will do well here

I bet that, about an year ago, you wouldn't have belived US spies en-mass on its own citizens.
Time will tell, grasshopper, time will tell...

There's a reason the world hates us and it's because we've basically told it and everyone in charge of it to go fuck itself for many years.

I used to admire you for this... late '60 to mid '70-ies must have been a good time to live there for this very reason. Nowadays...? I'm not so sure there's still something to admire, I'm not seeing the birdie-to-the-man gesture anymore (actually, I'm seeing EFF, but I'm not that sure I can equate EFF with the ethos of an entire american generation).

Hell we leak all your secrets ... etc

Apropos leaking ...
There was a time when Deep throat and Daniel Ellsberg were applauded for what they did, in spite running against the interest of the then-representing-the-interest-of-the-nation (or pretending to). Past times, better times...

so my only advice is be a polite loving contributing part of society

No qualms with being a contributing part of a civil society. I don't see how disagreeing with the way it goes make one love it less (love and the moral sense are two different things, ask any mother of a criminal).

...part of society and if it turns on you, you don't want any part of it anyway

Do you suggest mass suicide as the only way to get your freedom, would the govt turn against many?
Is it love to let the society (or just your community) slide into darkness without doing anything?

Re:Well..

[wonkey_monkey]

I get really confused that other countries are annoyed they get spied on. Do these other people actually trust their governments? Because that's weird.

You're implying that you don't trust your government, but aren't annoyed that you're being spied on. That seems weirder.

Re:Well..

[Anonymous Coward]

Err... you are not a citizen. You are still just one of HM's loyal subjects.

Re:Well..

[Anonymous Coward]

My point is: stop being just so used to... and do something if you don't want there

Such as what?

(No, really. I have a form of brain damage which gives me a sort of paralysis when I'm faced with a situation I haven't already planned for, or been through.)

Re:Well..

[Anonymous Coward]

Reminds me of an old post on newsgropus:

"spying, great British hobby, second only to gardening".

Wasn't 007 a British by any chance?

Re:Well..

[Anonymous Coward]

How do you think Sheriff of Walls Street E. Spitzer got nailed down?

BTW client number 5 turns out to be none other then Queen's own cousin.

How 'bout DSK?

Berlusconi?

There are lots of ways you can use intel info.

Re:Well..

[Anonymous Coward]

What does you inner self tell you to do?

Re:Well..

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm angry about this kind of thing, but I know that I won't be listened to. I want to do something, but I honestly have no idea where to start.

Re:Well..

[Ian A. Shill]

He was Irish.

Reminds me of an old post on newsgropus:

"spying, great British hobby, second only to gardening".

Wasn't 007 a British by any chance?

old news, old style

[turkeydance]

tell me something new.

Re:old news, old style

[Anonymous Coward]

tell me something new.

Forgot to take your dose of Ritalin, didn't you?

news worthy?

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess it is if you live in the middle east... but as an American this unlike the purly domestic shit is exactly what the NSA and allied signal intelligence agencies should be doing.

Re:news worthy?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I guess it is if you live in the middle east... but as an American this unlike the purly domestic shit is exactly what the NSA and allied signal intelligence agencies should be doing.

GCHQ decided to fuck with The Guardian and with Greenwald's partner.

Greenwald said "If the UK and U.S. governments believe that tactics like this are going to deter or intimidate us in any way from continuing to report aggressively on what these documents reveal, they are beyond deluded. If anything, it will have only the opposite effect: to embolden us even further."

A little story about a probably-sensitive GCHQ listening post seems like a warning shot in exactly that direction.

Re:news worthy?

[Anonymous Coward]

They should establish more middle east intel sites, that's their mission but not on domestic soil. Americans aren't the ones that started this shit by flying planes into buildings and I hope the one's who did that burn forever in hell.

Re:news worthy?

[cold fjord]

GCHQ has been known to have at least one listening post in that region for some time. I believe it has even made it to the papers before, not to mention books. I can't imagine Greenwald showing that much restraint.

Re:news worthy?

[Anonymous Coward]

They should establish more middle east intel sites, that's their mission but not on domestic soil. Americans aren't the ones that started this shit by flying planes into buildings and I hope the one's who did that burn forever in hell.

You can't even use an apostrophe correctly, you stupid redneck fuck.

And if you think the current mess was "started" when planes flew into
buildings, you are badly in need of at least an 8th grade education
in history.

Seriously, don't breed, there are no jobs for the children you are likely
to produce because machines can do it all better and more efficiently.

Re:news worthy?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's one way to look at it.

Another way to look at it is that The Guardian doesn't appear to be running with this story (yet, at least). The articles published by the BBC and the Guardian have been arguably in the public interest so far.

This particular leak, cost aside, is quite a long way off being in the public interest. It's also being led by the Independent, which along with most of the rest of the press in the UK has been pretty much silent up until now, and a follower of the leaks published in the Guardian rather than a leader.

The alternative view might be that this is a false flag. An article that can be shown to not be in the public interest and thus be used to shoot down any future publication. Possibly overly paranoid, but food for thought.

Re:news worthy?

[Anonymous Coward]

You must be the biggest ass-hole, fuck you !!

Re:news worthy?

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like I called it about it being a false flag operation.

"...not disclosing....where the base is located"

[Anonymous Coward]

So, it's in Israel.

Snowden the Defector

[cold fjord]

The Snowden leaks at this point are well past issues of Constitutional rights in the US. His leaks are directly damaging to the intelligence agencies of the US and its allies. The cover story of "whistle blower" is pure genius, it divides and confuses the public which gives him cover. It might even encourage copycats for additional damage. That is before you get to the question of friction between the US and its allies and trading partners, or the domestic political turmoil. It is truly a brilliant instance of political warfare. Soon we'll no doubt get to see Greenwald add to the damage.

So, where is Snowden at these days?

Re:Snowden the Defector

[Anonymous Coward]

Everything is "damage" to you people.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[jpublic]

His leaks are directly damaging to the intelligence agencies of the US and its allies.

I wish that were true. In fact, I wish his leaks do so much damage to them that it utterly destroys these parasites, but sadly, I doubt that's going to be the case.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[fustakrakich]

Oh come on... You know this shit's gotta happen every so often. It helps to keep the war... alive! Now they can fatten up the budget a bit and build a nice new station (like the owners burning down their own restaurant to write off and collect the insurance), and who's gonna bitch about it? Who's gonna listen? There's big money out there. Everybody wants a piece of the pie.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[cold fjord]

It's just as well. I'm reasonably certain you won't be doing anything to prevent truck bombs from exploding at shopping malls. Might as well have someone around that will.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[cold fjord]

But I don't want the budget fatter. ;)

Re:Snowden the Defector

[Anonymous Coward]

It's just as well. I'm reasonably certain you won't be doing anything to prevent truck bombs from exploding at shopping malls. Might as well have someone around that will.

How about having a foriegn policy that does not make the US a world class pariah, bully and insensative jerk.

How about not creating people with a desire to drive trucks ot explosives to the mall, by killing thier friends and families, wives, girlfriends, and daughters.

How about behaving like a world citizen instead of a playground bully out to grab everbodies lunch money.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[AHuxley]

How are the US public in any way confused?
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/22/us/2011-ruling-found-an-nsa-program-unconstitutional.html?_r=0
Selling expensive useless encryption is not "friction".

Re:Snowden the Defector

[Anonymous Coward]

You need professional help, because it is obvious that your mind is
not working logically.

You equate the exposure of crimes by the government with being
"damage".

Maybe your 300 pound wife believes your bullshit, but no one here does.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[Anonymous Coward]

This Jewish-Muslim thing has been going on for 1400 years. The US backed creating Israel after WW2 and upset the 'Status Quo', and then they passed it on to their kids to defend their faith, generation after generation.

The US gave lots of money to the Middle East to power our SUVs and big trucks. We also went off precious metals and on to oil to back up the US Dollar. It isn't just 'the government' doing the bad stuff, unless you ride your bike everywhere and have solar panels like me, you are part of the problem too.

Now these leaks are just exposing the capabilities and weaknesses in our defenses. I don't always agree with the offensive stuff, but you can't have peace if they are bombing you. And that goes for both sides. I' just wondering if Snowden wants America to be attacked again by basically telling people how to get around all of the preventative measures. And before you claim 'Boston', think that they might have got wise about how to pull it off already, and this just confirms they were right.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[Anonymous Coward]

I think I'll take the 0.0000000000000001% chance that that'll happen...

Re:Snowden the Defector

[Anonymous Coward]

It's just as well. I'm reasonably certain you won't be doing anything to prevent truck bombs from exploding at shopping malls. Might as well have someone around that will.

Actually what we need is fewer jerkoffs like YOU claiming everyone should
be afraid of things which don't happen and have not happened.

See, not everyone is interested in sucking up your bullshit and living in
fear. Some of us enjoy each and every single day and are not afraid
of anything. Life is unpredictable, and NO ONE can guarantee safety
in any respect. Life is best enjoyed as it comes, and there are NO guarantees.
Wise people know this and are not cowed by bullshit like you spew.

And by the way, chump, the the greatest danger anyone in the US
faces is driving a car in traffic. When are you going to do something about THAT very
real danger, asshole ? Of course doing something about traffic accident doesn't help you
gain or retain political power, so maybe that's why you are posting nonsense as you did
above. Just remember that not all of us are nearly stupid enough to believe your childlike
attempts at fear-mongering propaganda.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[cold fjord]

That ruling was for one program. NSA has a LOT more than that going on. The leaks have not been limited to that.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[cold fjord]

You fundamentally misunderstand al Qaida's motivation. Their ideology is that of aggressive imperialism. They are out to convert the world to Islamic belief and all the nations to rule by strict Islamic governments according to their strict interpretation of Sharia law. They understand this will be a long term struggle. If they are successful they will eventually come for everyone. At its heart this has nothing to do with the Anglosphere or Europe, and everything to do with them. To not understand that and be ready to defend yourself and Western civilization is a fundamental error that could prove costly in the long run. Crippling intelligence agencies will prove to be foolish.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[cold fjord]

I'm afraid you're confused. You seem to think that every action of the intelligence agencies is criminal, and that exposing them has no consequence. Both of those ideas are wrong.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[hammyhew]

Here he comes, cold fjord, the man himself!

Snowden and Greenwald are obstructing anti-terrorist agencies throughout the civilized world. Honestly, we should just lynch them. They're a disgrace.

-- cold fjord

Terrorism is a threat to the way we live our lives. We must give up our privacy if we want security (which we do, at any cost)

-- cold fjord

Fuckin' snowden piece of shit! How dare he do this! Snowden is fuckin' guilty as fuck! Kill him! Kill! Kill! Kill!

-- cold fjord

I'm gonna fuckin' kill Snowden, that fucking piece of shit fucker ass fuck shit ass fuck supreme fuck ass! GOD! He makes me so fuckin' angry! How dare he disobey me! Get him, boys!

-- cold fjord

Snowden is the worst thing to happen to this nation since the Constitution was formed and signed.

-- cold fjord

That fuckin' Snowden piece of shit! The government can do no wrong! The terrorists! Think of the terrorists, you fuckin' insolent insects! Give me all your privacy so we can stop the terrorists, you fucks!

-- cold fjord

Re:Snowden the Defector

[Anonymous Coward]

"Directly damaging to the intelligence agencies of the US and its allies" you say. And I say they fucking deserve it. Their actions and policies, by flouting the rule of law and violating the rights of the very citizens which they are supposed to be defending, make them worse enemies to their countries than any terrorists. They should take all the damage that can be given them until they are utterly destroyed!

Re:Snowden the Defector

[cold fjord]

Of course I didn't write any of that. Do you really think that troll will fool many people?

Re:Snowden the Defector

[jpublic]

It sure fooled me.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[cold fjord]

That speaks volumes about you, and nothing about me.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking of volumes, I'm about to deposit a large volume of fetid cum into your rancid rectum. It's going to fuse with the feces hidden deep inside to form the fabled Feces Soup.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[Anonymous Coward]

Your snap, snap, snap! I'll slurp your snap until nothing remains to be slurped! Oh, what's this? Your ass is... absolute garbage!? What an absolute garbage ass you have! Allow me to crumple up your absolute garbage cheeks and toss them directly into a mysterious dark alley that appeared only moments ago! Wow! Your ass is now stuck under a car seat, and there's a quarter going down a slot machine! Furthermore, the dark alley was located... in a living room! Such a thing! Someone just screamed, "I told you not to go in the living room!"

Wow! Major tickle! Major tickle on ass!

Re:Snowden the Defector

[Pseudonym Authority]

You want a bloated police state but you don't want to pay for it. Typical. Keep licking those boots, cold fjord, maybe they will kick you a bit softer when you've outlived your usefulness to them.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe not. He did however manage to sum up your rhetoric rather splendidly.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[oobayly]

Do you also quake in your boots at the thought of getting into your car and driving on public roads?

Re:Snowden the Defector

[LoRdTAW]

" It isn't just 'the government' doing the bad stuff, unless you ride your bike everywhere and have solar panels like me, you are part of the problem too."

Just shut the fuck up. Unless you live in a hut you fashioned out of materials you harvested by hand, hunt with spear or bow and arrow you hand made and farm your own food then you are also part of the problem. Stop acting like a childish, finger pointing pussy because you think you have environmental immunity. You don't.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[oobayly]

Of course I didn't write any of that.

I'm sure the NSA could fix it so that you did.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[cold fjord]

I didn't write any of that. That post is a troll.

Re:Snowden the Defector

[fustakrakich]

Ah, but they do..

Remember all those times the cables were cut?

[Anonymous Coward]

Now we know why.

Re:Remember all those times the cables were cut?

[elrous0]

Wonder what happened to those poor local saps who took the fall. Hope they at least got paid.

Re:Remember all those times the cables were cut?

[currently_awake]

Given that western countries built the whole system, and given how willing they are to install government monitors we should assume the system was set up originally for the purpose of spying. The cable breaks are probably just accidents- or organized crime looking for stuff to sell.

Re:Remember all those times the cables were cut?

[Burz]

Remember Skype's blackout? Six weeks later on 2/6/2011 they joined NSA's PRISM program. And given the P2P nature of Skype, I'm sure it was a more difficult conversion than the other services.

Re:Remember all those times the cables were cut?

[rwyoder]

Now we know why.

You don't need to *cut* a submarine cable to listen to it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ivy_Bells

Re:Remember all those times the cables were cut?

[photonic]

I presume that in the old days, they used electrical signals along those lines. With modern-day fiber-optic cables, you would have to cut open the cable, physically cut each fiber and splice in your secret device on the bottom of the ocean. With fibers currently porting more than one color of light and cables containing hundreds of fibers, you would probably need to leave several racks full of equipment to tap everything.

Re:Remember all those times the cables were cut?

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't need to cut an optical fiber either.

Re:Remember all those times the cables were cut?

[photonic]

Yes, you probably need to cut them. Go read about single-mode fibers: most of the light is contained in a guided mode inside the ~10 micrometer core of the fiber, while its amplitude decays exponentially inside the 125 micrometer diameter cladding, so no light reaches the outer surface of the fiber.

Re:Remember all those times the cables were cut?

[niks42]

Surely even fibre cables need active (viz, electronic) repeaters every so often? Wouldn't that be the sensible place to install a tee junction to listen to the traffic as well?

Re:Remember all those times the cables were cut?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_submarine_cable_disruption

To be more specific.

(Different AC)

Re:Remember all those times the cables were cut?

[photonic]

Long haul fiber optical signals are amplified using optical amplification these days. Basically, a small section of fiber is doped with some fluorescent molecules, which are pumped with a different color of light generated by a laser diode. The data never leaves the fiber. I guess the only way to intercept the data is to physically cut the fiber and slice in your secret box. This will be noticed.

Re:"...not disclosing....where the base is located

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

So, it's in Israel.

Not necessarily. Given the, um, togetherness in that neighborhood, do you think that the countries you'd really want to listen in on run their fiber any closer to the Israelis than they absolutely have to?

...running a secret Internet surveillance station

[fustakrakich]

In the words of the famous Inspector Clouseau: "Not anymore..."

007

[Anonymous Coward]

Did they catch Ernest Blofeld yet?

When I'm so tired

[Arancaytar]

that I read "Secret Middle Earth Web Surveillance" and Slashdot becomes, for just a few moments, a bit cooler.

Not just the UK

[WillAffleckUW]

Actually, there are separate ones for the UK, US, France.

And, of course, Israel.

But everyone knew that.

In case you were wondering, even if you are a citizen of the EU or US, all four listen to any email or phone call you make, even the ones you think are encrypted.

I'm surprised you didn't know this.

Re:Not just the UK

[manu0601]

I'm surprised you didn't know this.

It is just like PRISM: we knew it, but now we have proofs. That kind of disclosure has merit IMO

Re: Not just the UK

[Ragzouken]

I feel like I'm living in a world full of awful people. All this shit is happening and half the people I see claim to have known all along but just conveniently forgot to make the biggest fucking deal about it. Why are so many smug to be living under this?

Re: Not just the UK

[GameboyRMH]

You couldn't make a big deal about it until recently because there was no hard proof, you'd be treading into tinfoil hat territory. The Snowden leaks are that hard proof.

Re:"...not disclosing....where the base is located

[WillAffleckUW]

So, it's in Israel.

Not necessarily. Given the, um, togetherness in that neighborhood, do you think that the countries you'd really want to listen in on run their fiber any closer to the Israelis than they absolutely have to?

I see you missed the classes on How The Internets Work.

what country

[manu0601]

What country is it? We just have to look at where do most cables go. I bet on Egypt.

Re:what country

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.submarinecablemap.com/

Egypt is a good possibility, lots of cable pass near the mouth of the suez canal. It looks like there are four main landing points in, Suez, Zafarana, Abu Talat and Alexandria. Another possibility would be Fujairah in the UAE.

Re:what country

[AHuxley]

The AC have posted some great maps :) ty
Where would the UK like its Room 641A http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A ?
Down the list of hints:
"for the United States" seems to show no huge existing US bases/ports/forts/camps (AFRICOM/past CENTCOM) ie a very short list. A region (historically?) friendly to the UK with a 'new' US base on the way?
"underwater fibre-optic cables" so less need for a site with lots of bulk optical landing.
Why "secret" Middle-East internet surveillance base? Some regional leaders seem just fine with UK/US bases/hardware?
Iran is surrounded by the US, is north Africa ~ the "Middle East"? To the north of Iran ~ big UK oil? Lots of UK experts helping with post Soviet oil deals, new optical loops way north?
So an existing UK/US friendly country with one extra UK site fits anywhere in the region.

Your tax money at work

[c0lo]

TFA

The data-gathering operation is part of a £1bn internet project still being assembled by GCHQ. It is part of the surveillance and monitoring system, code-named “Tempora”, whose wider aim is the global interception of digital communications, such as emails and text messages.

Heck, UK's economy must be booming.

Actually that's completely and fantastically wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

What you're describing is called "reverse targeting", and it is just as prohibited as if the United States did it itself. Your comment is neither correct nor "insightful" (as it's currently modded).

The United States cannot target a foreigner to intercept the communications of one of its own citizens, nor can it use a second party nation (UK, CAN, AUS, or NZ), or anyone else, to target US citizens or anyone else it would be otherwise prohibited from targeting. Not only can it not do that, but the United States actually gives second party nation citizens the same protections (generally speaking) as US citizens, meaning we don't "spy on", say, UK citizens for them, either.

So if you want to believe that "information sharing" between the Five Eyes is designed to allow the US to skirt its own laws, be my guest; the only problem is that you would be completely wrong.

The latest declassified version of USSID 18 is an informative read.

Re:"...not disclosing....where the base is located

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't remember the chapter on Star Of David topology?

Dubai is full of british citizens

[Anonymous Coward]

and i can almost guarantee you that the site is Dubai. nowhere else makes sense really when you think about the variables involved.

Re:Dubai is full of british citizens

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, Dubai. Iran is heavily tapped into from there.

Listening posts

[AHuxley]

Listening posts where always an issue for the budget conscious UK before and after the 1990's but US (NSA/mil) cash often helped keep very expensive sites running.
The region knew all about US/UK bases. The leaders and their "freedom fighters" would have be aware of:
Masirah Island, Oman (with NSA)
HMS Vacoas, Mauritius, closed 1976
Meshed, Iran lost in 1979
Mount Olympus, Cyprus, (Project Sandra/US Cobra Shoe) 1959 till?
Muharraq, Bahrain
Mutlah Ridge, Kuwait, 1961- till?
Pergamos, Cyprus 1957 -till?
Perkhar, Ceylon, 1957-65
Silvermine, South Africa (1970's)
Steamer Point and Khormaksar ~ Aden
Yarallakos, Cyprus (NSA?)
Habbaniya, Iraq till 1957
Diego Garcia 1964 - with a some slight issues for a very short time over a cash for land deal.
Optical, satellite and the govs/telcos buying/upgrading into standardised tech makes the need for many locations less of an issue.

dubai, duh.

[Anonymous Coward]

dubai probably only exists because the intel services want it to exist. the entire state is non-sensical from any economic perspective. it has no workers, no products, no businesses other than tourism and 'financial services' and prostitution.

Re:dubai, duh.

[GameboyRMH]

It exists because they could sell the massive load of oil the country was sitting on. That counts as a business.

Tedious.

[Pino Grigio]

This is getting extremely tedious. The UK government has various listening posts all over the world. We've been involved with ECHELON intelligence since its inception decades ago. We've had ECHELON SIGINT stations on UK soil for decades too. Intelligence Services provide intelligence, doh, and they do it mostly by bugging, tracking and burgling. Intelligence allows your government to protect its vital interests.

There's a kind-of collective retardation in our newspapers at the moment. They seem to be suggesting that intelligence agencies do spying. Shocking Exclusive!

Re:Tedious.

[Anonymous Coward]

Not only that, but startling revelations that GCHQ has a gasp... chess club. Dark times indeed.

It's the volume of the data gathered that is the news, not the very obvious idea that spies do in fact spy. There's a big difference between believing that "spies are out there somewhere listening in on the bad guys" and "spies are out there somewhere listening in on pretty much everyone, including me" which is where I think the disconnect between public belief and reality occurs that makes this story.

Re:Tedious.

[AHuxley]

Why the intelligence agencies are in the press is over:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/22/david-miranda-court-victory-data-police
Using laws formed around the time of the Irish peace talks and turning it onto the UK press is not so smart.
The UK press is rather smart and knows the next step might be closed material procedures.
ie UK lawyers may never get to see much real evidence anymore, question, only a security-cleared lawyer or ‘special advocate’ might.
Welcome to a next gen Franz Kafka like trial.
So the UK press know they might be on a collective list and want to get out in front of the debate rather than face closed courts for just doing their jobs.

Re:Tedious.

[Anonymous Coward]

The retardation is all yours, young grasshopper.

The issue in the case of the US is that the US intel agencies have been
spying on US citizens without first obtaining warrants and this is ILLEGAL
under the highest law in the US.

And that IS a REAL ISSUE, whether you are mentally willing or able to grasp
it or not.

Re:Tedious.

[IamTheRealMike]

And how valuable is that, really? Valuable enough to enrage and piss off all kinds of countries who could be allies? See the mess that resulted after it came out GCHQ had been spying on foreign delegations to banking reform talks of all things. Who gives a shit about that? It's much more important that other countries diplomats feel secure and professionally treated when on British soil.

GCHQ is a relic, a holdover from the cold war that was never wound up properly. The vast majority of its spying is just cynical perversion of public infrastructure to give Britain an unfair legup over countries that don't do it. It's right there in the article - the spying is anything that enhances "British interests". That's gotta suck if you're founding a company in Turkey or the Ukraine that's trying to compete with a big company in the 5-eyes governments domains.

Re:Tedious.

[Pino Grigio]

The UK Government has been sending out D-Notices to newspapers to prevent them publishing things that might harm our vital interests since around the year 1912. Most comply. The Guardian, on the other hand, is up a shit creek without a paddle financially (which is kind-of funny as they promote debt fuelled government spending regularly in their editorials and of course their entire operation is debt fuelled and has been for years) and so is doing this primarily to gain a wider global audience. If you think they have your interests uppermost in their minds, I'm afraid you would be sadly mistaken.

Re:Tedious.

[Pino Grigio]

Get real Mike. All countries spy on all other countries. The Germans are spying on the British, the British on the French, the French on the Americans, the Americans on the Chinese. People want an edge in negotiations that affect their nation's interests. It's always been like this. Diplomats know it. Most embassies run agency stations inside them.

Re:Tedious.

[Anonymous Coward]

Quite, only media organizations that have corporate sponsorship to pay their bills should be trusted.

As we all know, for profit journalism ensures quality reporting.

Re:Tedious.

[kermidge]

This just in: newspapers want to make money. Details at 11.

Funny how that works:
Spread news widely, sell more newspapers.
Sell more newspapers, make money.
Make money, spread news widely.

I might guess that this bit of shocking news matters less to most than the topic under discussion. Or are we supposed to see that because The Guardian is in business that what they report is suspect?

Re:Tedious.

[Pino Grigio]

because The Guardian is in business that what they report is suspect?

Their motives are suspect, yes. And it's not beyond the wit of a newspaper editor to twist, lie and run a story that's extremely disingenuous. Or do you think there's a big hole in the backside of the editor and proprietors firing out a 2,000,000 watt beam of light? I guess you do. Well, you're a fool.

Re:Tedious.

[kermidge]

No, it was a question, not a statement of what I particularly believe. I can see where the possible sarcasm could come out as more than intended. I understand a bit of possible conflict of interest - twisting a story so's to be more dramatic as the tabloids do, and know from history (Hearst, et al) that some publishers are not above chicanery.

What I mean to ask is simple. Does a newspaper being in business require that it's stories are not honest reporting? On one end of things you've got a publisher who hires editors and reporters and tells them to go forth and do their thing; on the other end, a publisher might tell them the corporate catechism and instruct them that all reporting must cleave to it. Where do you think The Guardian lies on that continuum?

Re:Tedious.

[Pino Grigio]

The Guardian is not "in business". If it was it would have gone bankrupt years ago. It's being kept afloat by wealthy benefactors.

ECHELON

[Anonymous Coward]

Echelon has been known about for ages. Many of the allies have bases to scoop up data. their own citizens cannot be spied on, by law in some cases, but you spy on mine, i spy on yours, tradesies!

Re: "...not disclosing....where the base is locate

[acb]

Too obvious. Besides, none of Israel's neighbours expects anything but the worst from it and takes appropriate precautions.

I'd guess it's a moderate Arab state trying to balance between vociferously criticising Israel/the West and doing deals with them. Possibly a former British colony, like Kuwait, Egypt or the UAE.

Re:Actually that's completely and fantastically wr

[msobkow]

Uhunh. Yeah. Right. So all the "bi-lateral security agreements" that the government has bragged about are for what purpose, then?

Your NSA has been caught ignoring the rulings of the FISC that said their actions were illegal. They've been caught spying on Americans. What in all that's holy makes you think they wouldn't take data from a foreign government's spy agency when the Americans have repeatedly sent people to foreign nations to be tortured and to use that intelligence data despite the fact that it's illegal to do so?

traitor

[WindBourne]

Simply put, manning and snowden are traitors. Snowden is proving that he is much worse than is manning. He has just now, told AQ, again, how the west detects them. He is continuing this over and over and over.

I have been against interfering with Snowden and thought that we should just let him be in Russia. But at this time, if he suddenly dies, and all the data is grabbed, I am fine with that.

Re:traitor

[Anonymous Coward]

I have been against interfering with Snowden and thought that we should just let him be in Russia.
But at this time, if he suddenly dies, and all the data is grabbed, I am fine with that.

Your willingness to "not mind" if Snowden is murdered marks you as a morally bankrupt
person. And that is sad, both for you and for those whose lives will be made poorer by
knowing you.

But your assumption that "all the data" could somehow be "grabbed" marks you
as technologically illiterate. The very idea that "all the data" could somehow be "grabbed"
when there are many mirrors of the data in multiple locations makes your idea laughable,
even to ten year old children I know who are computer literate.

So you don't belong on this website because you lack the faculties
required to swim in this pool. Perhaps you can find a place on Facebook where
there are people stupid enough to accept your idiocy and the drivel you write.

Re:traitor

[WindBourne]

The one morally bankrupt are those who are busy putting down others while remaining anonymous. True coward.

In addition, with him putting out information that is NOT illegal for any nation to do, but that is of value to enemies, says that he is a traitor. The fact that he is now using this information as a way to blackmail his nation, speaks of even lower morals than yours.

Sorry, but I am not a believer in the death penality SAVE for treason or turning on your nation. As such, Snowden should be executed.

And you obviously have no idea about data, the net, or anything else that you talk about.

Re:traitor

[kermidge]

By all accounts, including The Independent, this bit of news on GCHG is not down to Snowden, so what changed? Btw, that Great Britain had listening posts abroad is not news but someone decided to make it so.

"all the data is grabbed" While the arrest of Miranda was likely an attempt to find some or all of the repositories, I highly doubt that there is a single complete list or that using a partial list will lead to other locations. If Snowden suddenly dies, I rather suspect that all of the material will be released at once by multiple unknown sources. The earlier destructions of hard drives and such at The Guardian's offices under the guise of security accomplished nothing other than sending a ham-handed threat.

While the bulk of AQ are hardly the brightest bulbs on the tree, I rather think that most anyone with some relevant technical understanding will long have known the basics. That a location of something is posited, or that a code name to a program is revealed adds no useful intel for anyone. Those details merely flesh out a larger story. As regards Manning, even the retired general charged by the court with investigating the harm caused by the material he passed on was unable to name a single person who came to harm. That the disclosures may have put a crimp on some of their activities is open to investigation. That some were embarrassed is obvious. (All three major official investigations of classification of which I've been aware all concluded that the majority of items classified were to prevent the embarrassment of higher-ups.)

I find it amusing and sad that diplomats presume their cables to be secure while at the same time expecting the communications of lesser mortals to be open. I suspect that one of the reasons that Congress and the mainstream media (apart from their corporate overlords' wishes) are not more exercised about the revelations of the past few months is that they are suddenly mindful that all their past decade's communications are, or can be, an open book. The executive doesn't have to say a word, just let the implications sink in. What might have become fruitful debate over a matter with grave constitutional import can now be swept away by the next crisis du jour.

So I suspect that, in a short while, whatever you or I think about any of this will be irrelevant. There will be bits and bobs of denouement that dribble out over time but they will vanish in the chatter of the rest of the ho-hum portions of the news.

Re:"...not disclosing....where the base is located

[SpockLogic]

The UK have sovereign bases on Cyprus, about 150 miles wet of Lebanon, and having a listening post on the top of the islands highest mountain shouldn't be difficult.

It's a James Bond movie

[jphamlore]

Obviously the station is on a fishing boat as in the James Bond movie For Your Eyes Only

Re:It's a James Bond movie

[Anonymous Coward]

Would have much respect if Britain put out an announcement to that effect.

Just the U.K.?

[edibobb]

Britain, along with France, Germany, U.S., Russia, China, Brazil, Japan, and quite possibly Lichtenstein.

This is a secret?

[Anonymous Coward]

His name is Lawrence, he's in Arabia. Duh.

Put some old news in a new context

[gmuslera]

like this cable cut near Egypt

in march (and probably others undersea cable cuts that happened recently close to that zone). Or it was an "oops, i did it again" from an agent, or was meant to be done that way (i.,e. an "accidental" cut by an anchor) so the company that repaired it added the extra functionality.

Re:Put some old news in a new context

[Burz]

Six weeks between the Skype blackout (Dec. 22, 2010) and the day Skype came online with NSA PRISM (Feb. 6, 2011).

Re:Put some old news in a new context

[ArchieBunker]

I'm pretty sure they have other ways of installing listening devices other than cutting the cable and splicing in a "T" fitting.

Re:Put some old news in a new context

[Thagg]

With fiber optics...I don't think it's very easy. Especially with the new doped fibers that do their own recharging.

It used to be that there had to be transceivers every so often along the fiber, to turn the optical signals back into electronic signals, then generate new laser pulses. The new cables basically build lasers into the fiber, allow it to refresh the signal without going through that process.

Re:Put some old news in a new context

[AHuxley]

So the classic option of a bend and mirror that the skilled staff at each end would never work out is now much less easy?

Re:Actually that's completely and fantastically wr

[icebike]

The United States cannot target a foreigner to intercept the communications of one of its own citizens, nor can it use a second party nation (UK, CAN, AUS, or NZ), or anyone else, to target US citizens or anyone else it would be otherwise prohibited from targeting.

Care to point to the law that says that?

I'm pretty sure that what intel the US comes by without dirtying their own hands is fair game.

Besides every BBC listening tower?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been in the London facilities of the BBC's worldwide translation station radio listening center. That is *not* a civilian listening station, that's an intelligence gathering center from the nature of its staffing, its security, and its software.

50,000 GCHQ documents?

[SpaceLifeForm]

I do not recall hearing this factoid. I believe most everything mentioned before predominately was from NSA docs, not GCHQ docs. Did The Independent get this correct?

And this:

Scotland Yard said material examined so far from the computer of Mr Miranda was “highly sensitive”, the disclosure of which “could put lives at risk”.

Examined? As in they broke the encryption? Or is this misinformation?

Re:50,000 GCHQ documents?

[oobayly]

It's definitely not disinformation:

we found Snowden's leaks stored in his electric toothbrush, so there>

Quoted an unnamed official who then blew a raspberry.

Re:50,000 GCHQ documents?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mr Miranda supplied the police with all his passwords (as you must under the law in the UK) so no encryption needed breaking, just unlocking.

Re:50,000 GCHQ documents?

[six025]

Mr Miranda supplied the police with all his passwords (as you must under the law in the UK) so no encryption needed breaking, just unlocking.

He may have been forced to supply all of his [i]own[/i] passwords, but that does not mean he had passwords for all of the documents he was carrying!

Re:50,000 GCHQ documents?

[jez9999]

Oblig. XKCD.

Your own link proves otherwise

[Camael]

Did you even check the source/link you posted?

The very first entry as of now, is Bush Secretly Lifted Some Limits on Spying in U.S. After 9/11, Officials Say

Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.

Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible "dirty numbers" linked to Al Qaeda, the officials said. The agency, they said, still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications.

Nearly a dozen current and former officials, who were granted anonymity because of the classified nature of the program, discussed it with reporters for The New York Times because of their concerns about the operation's legality and oversight.

So much for your comment that

'The United States cannot target a foreigner to intercept the communications of one of its own citizens, nor can it use a second party nation (UK, CAN, AUS, or NZ), or anyone else, to target US citizens or anyone else it would be otherwise prohibited from targeting.'

They've moved beyond that, they're targetting citizens directly, without warrants, i.e. illegally.

Re:Your own link proves otherwise

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems the system of presidential orders needs a serious overhaul?

What a load of lies

[Camael]

The Snowden leaks at this point are well past issues of Constitutional rights in the US.

Actually, I think the government intentionally breaching the Constitution is a much bigger issue than any intelligence leak. 50 years from now no one will care about the data Snowden leaked. OTOH, the government of today has set the precedent that it can ignore the protections provided by the Constitution. Imagine what the government 50 years from now can and will do.

His leaks are directly damaging to the intelligence agencies of the US and its allies.

And I'm sure you will provide some proof of that.

That is before you get to the question of friction between the US and its allies and trading partners, or the domestic political turmoil.

Friction and anger which is caused by the government's acts of covert surveillance. If your neighbour tells you a pervert has been spying on you, should you be angry with your neighbour or with the pervert?

Surprise! Oh wait

[Anonymous Coward]

Surprise! Intelligence agency gathers intelligence! Surprise! In other news, cats found saying "meow" while dogs reply with "woof". Story at 11. So we find agencies have little tiny 'shacks' in strategic places to 'catch' wifi signals, or radar signatures, or microwave transmissions, or cell calls, or (in reality) have wideband receivers that suck all that in plus radio and television and air traffic, police, fire, cordless phones, baby monitors, and every other bit of spectrum, along with automated analysis and report generation. Surprise! Echelon was designed as a world-wide network, and some of the data is stolen (intercepted) from local (foreign) intelligence agencies. Surprise! In other news, cats found saying "meow" while dogs reply with "woof". Story at 11.

Doing the Lords work

[Anonymous Coward]

Our species is suppose to keep an eye on those atavists.

Re:"...not disclosing....where the base is located

[grcumb]

So, it's in Israel.

No, it's Egypt.

They're not spying on the Middle East; they're spying in the Middle East... on all the data traffic running through the Suez canal. And that's basically everything between Asia and Europe.

Britain have had a watch on all traffic going through the canal pretty much from day one of its existence. And they've probably had communications taps in since the very first telegraph cables were installed.

I suspect I know where it is

[vikingpower]

Belfast, Northern Ireland. In the cellar under Barfoos Paki Takeaway-

Not news really is it, nt surprising

[Anonymous Coward]

GCHQ have been in Cyprus for decades, so what's the story. Kind of hanging on the coat tails here

Re:"...not disclosing....where the base is located

[Anonymous Coward]

Cyprus I would have thought, as there are already British bases there.

Nonsense

[dutchwhizzman]

You wouldn't put it on a fishing boat, that' be way too conspicuous. It's inside the volcano!

How about Fujairah UAE

[Anonymous Coward]

Most fibres for the Arabian paninsula Iraq and Iran pass through Fujairah in the UAE. Britain has long had ties with the rulers of the UAE and Oman. I think this would be the most likely location for the spying centre on the basis of the fibres making landfall there.

obfuscate

[alexmagni]

we are really, really without any way out if we dont start inundating them with noise...
please, people, install at once trackmenot or paranoid browsing

http://cs.nyu.edu/trackmenot/
http://boingboing.net/2013/08/18/paranoid-browsing-anti-profil.html

Re:"...not disclosing....where the base is located

[Anonymous Coward]

There already IS a listening post (for radio signals) on one of the mountains, I drove past it once.
I was thinking about Cyprus as well as I read this.
Former British colony, politically it is Europe, so safe and stable; geographically it is the Middle East. I think coast to coast the distance to Lebanon is only 60 kilometers (but I might be wrong). Plus the British have two bases there that are sovereign: they are British Overseas Territories.
All these facts combined make it a very likely candidate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhekelia

We are paying for this for our safety

[MultiPak]

Why do people moan so much. We can't spy on our own citizens: Who cares, are we so special that we cannot be spied on but other countries are fair game? We need to spy to catch people who need to be caught, domestic or foreign I really do not care. If my emails are read, ok, if my mail is intercepted, who cares, if my phone is tapped, who cares, if I have a file in some secret facility and they know I buy Cheetos, who cares. Crime, espionage and terroism cost us all money which directly effects the quality and lengths of our lifes, our childrens lives, in fact for all citizens on earth. Leaking information, such as the Independant newspaper has done, is not safe, will focus other's resources in to identifying this source, and as a result cost money and possibly lives. We feel more safe now than at any other point in time, that is not because of some self riteous idiot releasing facts that are better left alone. It is because we try to do the right thing in a world where many do the wrong thing. The cost of all this is hidden and incalculable. Shut up and leave it alone, careless talk cost lives.

Wrong title

[Anonymous Coward]

Shouldn't the title be
"Report: Britain Does Not Have a Secret Middle East Web Surveillance Base Anymore"
?

And in news not too far away ...

[skegg]

1) Poor Mr Greenwald: so young and healthy and yet he suffered a fatal heart attack.

2) Poor Mr Greenwald: his vehicle careening off the road like that.

3) Poor Mr Greenwald: killed last night while being mugged for cash and his cell phone.

4) Poor Mr Greenwald: left a note saying he decided to go backpacking around the world but no one's seen him since.

etc

Of course, I hope he lives a long and healthy life ...

Re:"...not disclosing....where the base is located

[Anonymous Coward]

Zafarana, Egypt. Seems cables serving half of globe's population run thourgh a single spot.

I want to see picture of a moron who designed that.

Re:"...not disclosing....where the base is located

[Anonymous Coward]

The Register comes to the same conclusion:

"On the face of it an obvious location for spying on submarine cables leading to Middle Eastern nations such as Syria, Lebanon and Israel would be Cyprus, which is an undersea cable nexus for the region. A base there could be located inside one of the island's British military base areas, which remain sovereign UK territory."

I think it's more weasel than that even.

[Anonymous Coward]

If I read correctly, the claim is that this sort of information is claimed by someone informing the Independent as being available in the documents Snowden has.

I.e.

Not saying that they've seen the documents.
Not saying that Snowden gave them this information.
Not saying that the information on the address of the listening station has been found in the documents.
Not saying that there is such a station in existence.

Confirmed by Snowden & Greenwald: Not Them

[FriendlyLurker]

Planted information to discredit Snowden or using Snowden's name to cover for another leaker?

"Snowden: UK government now leaking documents about itself" Wow, UK government are _really_ getting desperate scattering like cockroaches when the light gets turned on them...

Re:Surprise! Oh wait

[GameboyRMH]

For non-techies it should be a genuine surprise that spies aren't just spying on military targets, but every single one of us, and spying on foreign governments they are not at war with for economic and political purporses.

oman

[Anonymous Coward]

It's probably in Oman

Fair enough

[gelfling]

We need more 7/7 attacks. Glenn Greenwald asserts they are nothing more than the exercise of free speech. I'm fine with it.

Why is "Qatar" tagged on this story?

[barlevg]

The Independent newspaper said it was not disclosing the country where the base is located

Does someone on /. know something they're not supposed to be telling us?

remember the underwater cable cut by anchor

[Anonymous Coward]

This isn't really news. Remember the underwater fiber that was cut for a short time a few years ago. That would be one of the places where the communications are being duplicated and redirected to the listening post. People have been talking about how governments spy for longer than I've been around. Even President Lincoln had folks spying on telegraph transmissions.

Not sourced from Snowden materials

[Vainglorious Coward]

The important story here is not that there's more secret surveillance, it's that the Independent claims that the story is based on materials from Snowden, and he and the Guardian flat-out deny that. The obvious implication is that the UK government itself "leaked" the material to the Independent, to create an appearance of potential danger to people arising from "the Snowden disclosures", a type of release that Snowden and the Guardian have strenuously avoided.

Re:Not sourced from Snowden materials

[Above]

No upvotes, but this is an important post that I'm afraid will be lost now that this story is a bit older.

Not Greenwald

[Vainglorious Coward]

Regardless of your imaginings about Greenwald, this latest release is nothing to with him or the Guardian, but comes from another newspaper the Independent. Snowden and the Guardian strongly dispute that Snowden's materials are the source of the Independent's story, and claim that the UK government itself must be the source of this particular material.

It's not from Greenwald

[Anonymous Coward]

This story is not from Greenwald and he is disclaiming any connection with it

Snowden denies any involvement in this one

[Anonymous Coward]

His leaks are directly damaging to the intelligence agencies of the US and its allies.

If you read carefully, The Independent didn't actually say their information was ever from Snowden himself, they simply said it was from the same documents Snowden also had access to.

Snowden/Greenwald NOT the source

[atfrase]

The article cites Snowden's files as their source, but Snowden and Greenwald have both explicitly denied that, and even go further to assert that neither of them have provided any information whatsoever to the Independent:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/23/uk-government-independent-military-base

That means somebody is lying, and that is extremely important and worth your careful consideration, no matter who you think it is.

I'm disappointed that this development hasn't already been modded up in the comments here; a lot of folks are jumping to conclusions by taking the Independent at their word about who leaked this particular information.

WHO REMEMBERS THIS LITTLE NUMBER?

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

I JE'd about it, and tried to get a Slashdot frontpage submission. Linked stories?

After what you've learned over the past 3-4 months, it's hard to discredit this, outright.

A total of five cables being operated by two submarine cable operators have been damaged with a fault in each.

These are SeaMeWe-4 (South East Asia-Middle East-Western Europe-4) near Penang, Malaysia, the FLAG Europe-Asia near Alexandria, FLAG near the Dubai coast, FALCON near Bandar Abbas in Iran and SeaMeWe-4, also near Alexandria.

The first cut in the undersea Internet cable occurred on January 23, in the Flag Telcoms FALCON submarine cable which was not reported. This has not been repaired yet and the cause remains unknown, explained Jaishanker.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/theuae/2008/February/theuae_February155.xml&section=theuae

Re:WHO REMEMBERS THIS LITTLE NUMBER?

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_submarine_cable_disruption

Remember when...

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember when fiber optic cables were "going black" for a few day throughout the middle east a few years ago. That was when they having taps applied.