Slashdot Mirror
Amnesty International Seeks Explanation For 'Absolutely Shocking' Surveillance
Mark Wilson writes: A court recently revealed via email that the UK government had been spying on Amnesty International. GCHQ had put Amnesty under surveillance — despite this having previously been denied — and now the human rights organization wants answers.
In a letter to the UK Prime Minister David Cameron, Amnesty International asks for an explanation for the surveillance. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal's (IPT) email made it clear that GCHQ had been intercepting, accessing and storing communications, something that Amnesty International's Secretary General, Salil Shetty believes 'makes it vividly clear that mass surveillance has gone too far'.
In a letter to the UK Prime Minister David Cameron, Amnesty International asks for an explanation for the surveillance. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal's (IPT) email made it clear that GCHQ had been intercepting, accessing and storing communications, something that Amnesty International's Secretary General, Salil Shetty believes 'makes it vividly clear that mass surveillance has gone too far'.
Why should amnesty international be treated any differently to everyone else?
Political organisation tries to make political capital from same.
Film at 11.
They don't want to know about State-sanctioned international child trafficking and systemic child sexual abuse - IN ENGLAND, but the SECOND the camera gets turned on them they get fucking pissy!? Fuck off!
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
Now i know no one reads the article so I'll summarize one point
If Amnesty International is being spied on, then is anyone safe?
Nope, they know how many times you wipe and how many sheets you used. Welcome to the 21st century.
They think they'll get a meaningful reply! This is nothing more then a fund raising exercise for amnesty.
also, "because we are scaredy cowards"
-- your friendly neighbourhood world leaders.
That "scandal" - crime really - of aid workers trading sexual favors with young children for food.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2002/feb/28/voluntarysector
That is what this is about. Not fundraising. Not how many times you wiped.
This is about the state trying to protect the pedophile, not the starving child. Perhaps they think that because it is "consensual" it isn't abuse, crime, or pedophillia!
It would be good if the resources currently being spent to protect the abuser were instead spent trying to protect the child.
Do you even know what organisation you're talking about? Overwhelming majority of Amnesty's work is outside modern Western world. And they pick up "fights" with targets that are overwhelmingly more powerful than their organisation routinely. It's their mission to do so.
And they believed what politicos and civil servants told them !!!.
The spooks in the uk have far more un-important stupid things to waste vast amounts of cash and resources on,but also manage to miss/ignore more important things....
Overwhelming majority of Amnesty's work serves western powers rather than the other way round. Which explains why things can happen like someone in the US state department taking over the lead in Amnesty US (Suzanne Nossel).
They're very weak in their criticism of western targets.
Exactly. Amnesty is one of many soft power tools of the western establishment.
The main reason why AI is "very weak in their criticism of Western targets" is for a very simple reason - Western societies have far lesser violations of issues AI works against.
The worst offender of the West, US is still far better than most of the third world in terms of due process available and incarceration.
And when you have drones incarceration is not even needed.
âoeIn our country, do we want to allow a means of communication between people which we cannot read? My answer to that question is: 'No, we must notâ(TM).â - David Cameron, PM, UK, Jan 2015
http://www.independent.co.uk/l...
Posturing histrionics.
Have gchq or other intelligence organizations ever used the data inappropriately?
To suggest that such organizations are somehow morally above being spied-upon ignores the long long history of such groups being used as cat's paws by others whose intentions are not so noble.
Sorry, if I'm in charge of security for a church, I'm still frisking the nuns, because to do otherwise would be irresponsible.
-Styopa
Due process? That's a novel way do describe throwing shit at suspects until something sticks, or just raising the stakes until the defendant will take any plea "bargain" because he or she simple can't afford neither to defend himself, should he be lucky enough to be initially afford it.. Never mind actually getting a competent lawyer, or the risks of fighting the charges in front of a potentially biased, not very well educated or even very bright jury.
It might still be better than Iran, but that still doesn't make the way the US system "works" anything less than a true disgrace. It's certainly not "due process", unless you assign some serious level new-speak meaning to that expression.
Incineration is much more effective!
The main reason why AI is "very weak in their criticism of Western targets" is for a very simple reason - Western societies have far lesser violations of issues AI works against.
The worst offender of the West, US is still far better than most of the third world in terms of due process available and incarceration.
When you make statements like that, and if you want to be accurate, you need to define what terms like "Western targets", "Western societies", and "the West" mean. Does it include Saudi Arabia, Poland, Qatar, Israel and Turkey? Certainly, those countries, although maybe not geographically west, all have decent arguments for being labeled as being in the Western sphere of influence.
And in your comparison, are you factoring in the size of the country?
Finally, you must know the US doesn't rate well in terms of incarceration, which is almost the definition of non-liberty. We (of the US) have the worst per-capita rate.
Regarding Amnesty International, I estimate their official opinion is roughly like that of a European country. It's more or less on the good-guy side, but is overly influenced by the US & UK governments.
(||) Nehmo (||)
The abuser is a member of the Elite. The children? You could spread them on toast like pate and eat them, nobody would care. They're not the scions of the Elite. In this world there are nobles, those who serve the nobles, and little folk. Sucks to be the latter.
I don't mean to be overly critical about the western human rights record but that's not the reason,
that AI or HRW are not very critical. Internally western countries are better off, that's not the issue.
As soon as you check the criticism that should be made, AI and HRW come off as pretty weak. If you count the allies in the western camp it's already disastrous. If you count the external actions of the western camp. also a disaster.
Another poster mentions the drone war. It's a good example because nobody in the west is bothered much by that. To us it feels like a minor issue, a necessary evil and not much of a big deal anyway. So neither is Amnesty bothered. You should check the legality. You should check polls in the arab world about them. You should check the effectiveness(I think 2%) and the strategic effect of them, it's pretty much putting out fire with gasoline.
One reason you think western actions are alright is because you rely on western sources for your judgement. There's a good variety of western sources in principle, but all those that rise to the top are mediocre. You almost need to go to cantankerous antisocial radicals to get a decent view. There's this kind of cascading effect where people right at the source are already being very measured in order not to be dismissed. And then every level it goes through more filtering occurs. So a watered down report may be published by AI, but then they don't make too much noise about it, and then the press filter it again.
At the moment there's Yemen. Not particularly an AI/HRW issue but at least it gives a good idea of what I think :) /publishable opinions.
It's pretty much a one sided invasion with a complete cutoff of all resources: 90% of the food has to be imported through the ports so you've got instant famine. What do we hear at the end of the line? Some kind of proxy war between Saudis and Iran, which is two lies in a few words. Iran is hardly involved and it's not a proxy war at all. Just the Saudis attacking because of some peace agreement they didn't like.
So in principle all human rights organisations should be yelling bloody murder.
Instead this kind of reaction is considered a radical opinion that doesn't fall in the range of reasonable
We see the same nonsense in the US. The problem is that security can never be perfect and that is used as an excuse for ever more invasive security measures. In the US we had the 9/11 terror attacks. The public got severely upset and government jumped off the rails. And I have no way to give numbers or specifics but I strongly believe that the US could absorb a punch as severe as the 9/11 at least once a year without the nation falling apart. But we are already seeing a loss of free speech and people must guard their remarks rather carefully. I am not convinced that our security and military efforts have done anything good for us at all.
Except that during the period of leftist revolutions all over the world AI doggedly pursued and questioned the actions pro-Western government armies while having a written policy of not criticizing the guerrilla actions. This asymmetric prosecution of human right crimes was only changed after the end of the cold war.
Because they get in the way of countries "dealing" with those they don't like.
Always read at -1, don't let others decide what you should and should not read.
The Illumanati who secretly run everything are building the world's largest collection of dick pics. Their end goal is to be able to look at the penis of every man on the planet. Now you might think that sounds gay, and it is, They just pop them up on the big wall of monitors and masturbate to them. Right now someone in GCHQ is masturbating to a picture of your penis, and there's nothing you can do to stop it. Even if you find their secret bunker and the secret room in the secret bunker with the big wall of dicks, go down there and wander in on them, they won't stop masturbating. You'll be all like "HEY! Is that a PICTURE OF MY DICK?!" And they'll be all like "OHH YEAH HNGGG!" So just sit back and feel secure in the knowledge that the world is safer because every intelligence organization on the planet has a picture of your dick.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Except that during the period of leftist revolutions all over the world AI doggedly pursued and questioned the actions pro-Western government armies while having a written policy of not criticizing the guerrilla actions. This asymmetric prosecution of human right crimes was only changed after the end of the cold war.
[citation needed]
Stephan
Who really controls secret service agencies? It seems they often operate in an undemocratic vacuum ...
US is still far better than most of the third world in terms of due process available and incarceration.
That is no way to conduct a standards test! And in terms of incarceration, you are right about the US being number one, higher percentages, higher numbers all around.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
I think Amnesty International should care more about Manning, Snowden and the other whistleblowers. We know much more about how the world really works because of their sacrifices, and Amnesty is not doing anything. What they are going through for exposing morally questionable behaviour from several goverments is not okay.
I can understand the reasoning from these goverments, but they should really get their sh*t together and stop shoveling money into some peoples/corporations pockets, and instead focus on stuff that actually benefits "we the people", who is really paying for all of this.
Please read: "Amnesty: A reputation at risk" over at the Economist website:
http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21645806-weightiest-human-rights-outfit-has-waded-moral-quagmire-reputation-risk
Amnesty together with Cage blame UK for beheadings.
My reply: go stuff yourself, Amnesty.
On a personal note, I don't like Amnesty's million-dollar payouts to bosses:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358537/Revealed-Amnesty-Internationals-800-000-pay-offs-bosses.html
Your Utopian idylls are trite. This does not mean I do not agree with you on principle. It means I think you would have to be a complete moron to expect anything different. This includes the lies, the act, and the continued action long after we have finished this conversation. Bitching about it online does you no good. Your apathy, laziness, and disregard for your social contract obligations are why they will keep doing what they are doing. You can blame it on them but, frankly, they are only doing what comes naturally and to think it would ever be different is to spit in the face of reality.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Some of the best media comes from a source that many of us, in the West, are prejudiced about (intentionally or unknowingly). Al Jazeera (spelling?) is actually fairly well informed, surprisingly objective, and willing to approach subjects that are foreign to us in the West. Obviously no single news source should be consumed as factual by the consumer. Laziness on behalf of the consumer is, by no means, a responsibility of the provider. No news service has been, or ever will be, without bias. This has never been the case though people think it was better in the past - like conservatives long for the 50s. They think it was good, investigative, and idealistic in the past because they consumed media that fit their views.
Al Jazeera has biases but they are not what you probably assume and they are open about it while still being willing to be critical of even themselves. They remind me of PBS in a way and we can all generally agree that PBS is biased at times and if we are willing to be honest with ourselves even if we agree with their biases. We can all agree that Fox is biased if we are honest. Check out what the press did during the French Revolution. They can be cock-suckers and can not be trusted. It is up to you to read beyond the news. Consider the news like Google, consider it the start page. Like Google you may need to click more links, figuratively, to get a factual response and, quite often, you really should be reading more than one single link.
So, they have a slant but it is right in front of you and obvious and factual. The key is the last part. They will even point out facts, and discuss them and investigate them, on subjects we would not dream of publishing. They will do this while being critical of the religious and governing bodies of the various countries which they typically cover. They are willing to only share certain media in certain governments so the government has ultimate control in some areas I understand. However, they have an international coverage as well and they will do all sorts of things that do get censored. They worked hard to have this right. I am impressed with them. They take their obligation seriously and they take their consequences seriously. They are a news organization not a martyr. They have had enough martyrs already and that is how they got these rights. They are serious business...
Anyhow, I figured I'd share my opinion because you spoke of the drone war and how much the differences are between the perceptions. If people were more inclined to get their media from sources outside of their comfort zone then maybe this would change?
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Canadian here. Although part of the west I have to agree. Western establishment and media tends to trot out human rights groups they themselves fund and support when criticizing non-western countries... then flipflop on certain human rights they claim to support when those same human rights groups criticize them for violating them (e.g. Bush who clearly used torture should have seen trial for potential war crimes but is instead enjoying rounds of golf)
.then along with the NSA and GCHQ violates the right to privacy of billions of people )
That said, human rights groups are not above criticism themselves. Who the f-ck made unelected NGOs the unquestionable priest class for what should and shouldn't be a right? A large chunk of "human rights" activism is just a front for leftist political ideology just like a fair chunk of it is just a smokescreen for nationalists and religious fanatics (e.g. the Holocaust industry, Islamophobia, US state department "human rights" reports that have the audacity to lecture about torture, or even my current government than claims to stand for "human rights'..
The morons that complain about those that point out this hypocrisy in the west think that everyone that complains about are sympathetic to oppression elsewhere in the world. They can't understand the concept of principle or simply think they are above them. The way to spot a BS artist is to see if they follow their principles regardless of what nation they live in or economic policies they believe in... or whether they just point fingers at everyone else without looking in the mirror. Sophistry posing as ethics.
Another poster mentions the drone war. It's a good example because nobody in the west is bothered much by that. To us it feels like a minor issue, a necessary evil and not much of a big deal anyway. So neither is Amnesty bothered. You should check the legality. You should check polls in the arab world about them. You should check the effectiveness(I think 2%) and the strategic effect of them, it's pretty much putting out fire with gasoline.
As a general FYI, AI is anti-drone.
Their position is that the USA has a right to use military force, but not this way.
They have this to say
http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/security-and-human-rights/drones
http://www.amnestyusa.org/sites/default/files/usa_targeted_killing.pdf
Here is their testimony in front of the US Congress.
http://www.amnestyusa.org/pdfs/SenateJudiciaryDronesTestimony04162013.pdf
And Iran in turn is far better than much of third world, where they often don't really have courts - they have lynchings.
Consider India for example. Girl of lower caste gets raped by boy of higher caste, goes to the police. Police ridicules her and on her way back, her own villagers lynch her and hang her.
Does your "oh noes, bad due process in US" start to sound quite good in comparison to you yet?
You get worse than that across much of Africa and Papua New Guinea for example, where you have similar courts of public opinion, and where they have a strong belief in sorcery and witchcraft. Or countries like Eritrea, where court system mostly exists to simply supply slave work force to the government?
Have you tried wikipedia yet?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
And surprisingly, local governments are often in full support of drone killings. Consider Yemen which is now in a full civil war in part because of the government's actions.
Plus a whole lot of Iran's and al Qaeda's actions.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
I mean, come on. Amnesty International is against torture. That's supporting the terrorists against the heroes and patriots that are having a bit of innocent fun defending our government and its values.
"uBlock is using 33MB of RAM" - by andymadigan (792996) on Friday June 12, 2015 @10:31PM (#49902053)
Inefficient: Hosts @ 3-11mb w/ current data & does things adblock variants can't & U RAN FROM IT http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... ).
UBlock uses 63++ MB & AdBlock = 128mb++ -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...
SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...
BEST UBlock's done = 38mb/ABP = 64mb -> http://www.extremetech.com/wp-... From http://www.extremetech.com/wp-...
* See 'p.s.' below - Says all (& I didn't do the saying!)
---
"which blocks more ads? Answer: uBlock/Adblock" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)
WRONG - "Almost ALL Ads Blocked"'s PAID NOT TO by default-> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...
&
ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...
UBlock/Adblock = far less efficient on CPU & RAM (added messagepassing, SLOW usermode vs. hosts in kernelmode) & NEITHER does a fraction of what hosts do in more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity.
---
"your system blocks fewer ads" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)
See above: + hosts do MORE w/ less via 1st link above!
---
"I'm more than happy to spend an extra 1% of my computer's power to block far more ads than your shitty idea" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)
You're 'happy' being illogical & stupid?
AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU use inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
+
ClarityRay defeats it & NOT hosts (clarityray BLOCKS addons via native browser methods).
---
YOU started it -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... & here too http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
I finished YOU WITH IT all above!
APK
P.S.=> Howard Stark in "Capt. America" - hosts (Cap's Shield) vs. AdBlock & variants (steel):
"It's stronger than steel & 1/3rd the weight"
So
"Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" & "eat your words"
... apk
"Chrome has thankfully started warning users who try to download it." - by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @03:48PM (#49909947)
Google can try explaining it vs. proof my ware's CLEAN:
MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee who also has the source & verified it safe too) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...
&
It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
* :)
In case you hadn't noticed it, like when you made your PUNY THREATS effetely *trying* to "blackmail me" on Hilton Hotels here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ?
(which I could give 2 fucks about, I made the money already on a successfully done large scale project with them on contract)
I SMOKED YOU TOTALLY @ EVERY TURN, & who started it twice here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... AND HERE TOO http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... saying "I should die painfully" etc. - et al?
You failed badly on all accounts.
APK
P.S.=> Especially funny is that you work for CLOUDWORDS (an advertiser affiliate of Marketo) which tips your hand & PROVED YOUR ILL MOTIVES for your stupidity, running away from this most of all -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
... apk
"If you allow intelligence agencies to gain access to unlimited amounts of information, with no regard for privacy, they can use it to blackmail anyone." - by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday July 12, 2015 @07:13PM (#50095049)
See subject - You can't do that to me queer but you tried:
"I'll be sure to let Hilton Hotels know what kind of person they're hiring." - by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @01:29PM (#49909329)
FROM -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
* Poor lil' "raggedy andy" tried to BLACKMAIL ME, & failed, lol... by 'threatening me' regarding a job I did - & found out it was an already completed contract I just did for a mass server + workstation + DCOM custom application migration network-wide for HILTON...
APK
P.S.=> How PITIFUL & WEAK could a man be? Witness the antics of andymadigan, sanfran man, above... R O T F L M A O! apk