SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Terrorism will cast a continuing shadow over future generations and government electronic surveillance is a small price to pay to combat it, a leading historian said Wednesday, a day after the carnage in Brussels.
British author and journalist Max Hastings gave a robust defence of electronic intelligence-gathering in what he called a new world that would never know absolute security.
"Our tolerance of electronic surveillance, subject to legal and parliamentary oversight, seems a small price to pay for some measure of security against threats that nobody—today of all days—can doubt are real," Hastings told Hong Kong's Foreign Correspondents' Club.
Twin attacks by Islamic State jihadists killed around 35 people in the Belgian capital Tuesday.
Hastings, a former war correspondent and newspaper editor, is author of 26 books mostly on military history.
His latest, "The Secret War", tells the story of behind-the-scenes intelligence operations in World War II.
Future wars "will almost certainly" be fought on similar turf.
The expert named did not explain how the current total surveillance did not prevent the Brussels attacks. In other news, he taped a "Dox me and SWAT me" sign to his own back.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Rosco P. Coltrane on Friday March 25 2016, @05:14PM
Case in point: the Brussels terrorists didn't use it [ibtimes.com] because, well, they're not stupid. The authorities are fully aware of this. They're just using any new "terror" event to justify further encroachment on civil liberties and make people swallow the pill little by little.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bob_super on Friday March 25 2016, @05:20PM
No encryption, just a lot of burner phones, bought apparently with stolen cards...
Time to get back to HUMINT.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Friday March 25 2016, @05:32PM
"Time to get back to HUMINT."
You bet your ass it is. Police forces seem to have stopped "investigating" crime, preferring to rely on electronic surveillance. They've gotten lazy - or worse than merely lazy. How did cops a generation ago solve crimes?
Alright, so maybe cops weren't infallible a generation ago - they convicted people who were innocent, and they missed the bad guys often enough. Still - when they DID get it right, how did they do it? Foot work. Interviews. Interrogations. Wire tap warrants. Forensics. Real police work, is how they did it. Apparently, if a crime doesn't leave digital evidence, today's cops will never solve the crime.
Fascist bastards.
I said what I said. - Sophie Cunningham
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25 2016, @05:35PM
This is all too expensive. Think about taxes, man, taxes... They'll have to go up. Do *you* want to pay more in taxes?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Spook brat on Friday March 25 2016, @05:58PM
I like to pay taxes. With them, I buy civilization.
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. [goodreads.com]
Sorry, no XKCD from me on this one.
Travel the galaxy! Meet fascinating life forms... And kill them [schlockmercenary.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25 2016, @08:05PM
Maybe I can help... Oblig XKCD [xkcd.com].
(Score: 5, Informative) by frojack on Friday March 25 2016, @05:56PM
Humint isn't about investigating crime.
Its about investigating Pre-Crime.
The difference is HUMINT is targeted, and allows crime preemption and prevention.
Mass surveillance is only useful in finding the culprits AFTER they've blown up an airport, or flown a plane into a building.
But when the attackers these days are blow themselves up in the process, we have very little reason or ability to find culprit after the fact, because they are pink misted all over the walls.
Trying to find bad intent in speech or written communication by FILTERING ALL such communication is a fools errand. This was recognized a year ago. [zdnet.com]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday March 25 2016, @06:05PM
Well, "human intelligence" is most useful before a crime is committed. But, the same humint can be used after the crime has occurred, to solve the crime. It's just a matter of focus and intent how humint is collected and used.
I think that the people pushing for universal surveillance HOPE that said surveillance can prevent crime. But, for the most part, I think that it will remain useful in solving crimes after the fact. As others have pointed out, the scope and scale of data collection prevents anyone from making real use of the data. It's a damned fools errand.
I said what I said. - Sophie Cunningham
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25 2016, @06:32PM
the scope and scale of data collection prevents anyone from making real use of the data.
I disagree, it would be very useful for blackmail, leverage, insider-trading etc. Just not so useful for stopping terrorists. The terrorists could agree on what to do and what coded messages (e.g. "the burger is ready, are the fries ready too?") to use long before they get into your country. How are you going to figure out these bunch are going to kill lots of people and themselves just from surveillance in your own country?
Based on the deceitful stuff that's been happening e.g. trying to misrepresent what the terrorists have actually been doing just to push for mass surveillance over and over again at every opportunity I doubt terrorism is the real issue.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25 2016, @08:04PM
I hadn't thought of the fact that it could be used for insider trading. Maybe mass surveillance isn't as evil as I'd assumed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25 2016, @06:02PM
Sorry Runaway - 1976 was TWO generations ago, not one. And cop movies from that era are AWESOME.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Saturday March 26 2016, @05:35AM
My favorite cop show: "Highway Patrol", Broderick Crawford. From the '50's.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25 2016, @06:37PM
Fascist bastards.
Bastards, yes they are. Fascist, not really.
A Fascist leadership takes responsibility for everything that happens in their land. They solve the root cause, so problems do not happen, or do not show up ever again.
I don't see the police (or an intelligence agency) taking full responsibility for a terrorist attack. In fact, they tell you they need to take away (more | all) of your rights. They are clearly not Fascists.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday March 25 2016, @05:27PM
I wonder if quitting social media is a "selector" these days.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25 2016, @05:30PM
Simple: never start... (just say "NO"!)
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25 2016, @06:43PM
What about those who started social media before it became an issue to use social media?
What if you got a facefuck account before you realized it was a Jewish trap? Quitting is not so easy anymore. Not using cell phone also gets you flagged as a person of interest.
Its time to hire someone part-time who would make updates to your social media accounts for you, using your location. Perhaps logging into your computer securely and making updates using that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25 2016, @06:48PM
before you realized it was a Jewish trap
I see... you're here to talk about something completely different, aren't you?
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25 2016, @08:07PM
Tay, is that you girl?
(Score: 2) by Kromagv0 on Friday March 25 2016, @07:21PM
Or just post the most inane shit like cat videos/GIFs.
T-Shirts and bumper stickers [zazzle.com] to offend someone
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25 2016, @05:39PM
So the government is using terror to push forward their agenda? Sounds like domestic terrorism to me. Be afraid citizen or else!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Rosco P. Coltrane on Friday March 25 2016, @05:48PM
Why else would they push for increase restrictions when they know full well they won't solve anything?
- Closing the borders (at least in Europe): the sleeping terror cells are already there. What's the point?
- Total internet surveillance: smart terrorists communicate without using the internet. What's the point?
- Banning encryption: smart terrorists don't use encryption, they communicate in clear to hide in plain sight. What's the point?
- IDing people when the board a plane. The 9/11 terrorists had valid passport. What's the point?
And so on and so forth. It's obvious to whoever cares to look at the situation that terrorism countermeasures are really designed to keep the general population under surveillance.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anal Pumpernickel on Friday March 25 2016, @05:56PM
Well, according to this "expert", living in a police state would be a small price to pay. Which really leads me to ask why these people even live in countries that supposedly strive to be free when freedom is so obviously not what they want.
(Score: 2) by SanityCheck on Friday March 25 2016, @06:40PM
I think some studies have shown that large percentage of populace are actually authoritarian in nature, and that they crave the type of close control a totalitarian police state would require.
These to me seem like the sheepest of sheep, people who cannot think for themselves because the world is too complicated, so they believe that things are simple and want to be divorced from any possibility of being wrong about that.
So these people appear in all walks of life, and in all places. But they still consider their country to be their home. They just want their home to be more cuddly-wuddly in the sense that they find comforting. Simply telling them to time travel to Germany Circa 193X is not an option, because they are not Germans from the 1930s.
I don't really have anything against such people, they are OK in general and keep to themselves. I just pity them a bit.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25 2016, @06:46PM
I think some studies have shown that large percentage of populace are actually authoritarian in nature, and that they crave the type of close control a totalitarian police state would require.
I think you're conflating a couple of studies... The real problem is the us-them association. People tend to think they are on the 'us' side of the equation and are therefore much more likely to go along with authority since they think it will work "for us". However, they only very infrequently and seldomly realize that they are on the 'them' side after all...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25 2016, @08:16PM
Because Korean is a difficult language for Europeans? Say what you will about the North Koreans, but they don't go crying "terrorist!" over every mishap. For instance, when an apartment building collapsed, they said it had been poorly constructed.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-korea-north-building-idUSBREA4H00M20140518 [reuters.com]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by mhajicek on Friday March 25 2016, @06:53PM
Such attacks are statistically insignificant. Terrists could blow up 35 people every single day and it would still be statistically insignificant. Do we need totalitarian oversight to reduce bicycle accidents and bathroom falls?
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25 2016, @07:01PM
For fuck's sake, shut up, man!... You might give them ideas...
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25 2016, @10:04PM
George "the second" Bush, won the war for 9/11 bombers... by destoring our freedoms in the name of freedom.
That is right. He did what they wanted him (and Chaney and Congress) to to do, destroy our way of life:
Justice for one. Now you can be accused of being a terrorist and lose your rights without a trial, and are blocked from an attorney.
Freedom of though and speech is another.
Lets not forget the H1B taking our jobs to boot.
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Saturday March 26 2016, @06:50AM
He wasn't alone.. John Major in the UK, John Howard in Australia.
Sign up to kill ragheads.
Or something.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex