UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question

comperedna Sat 8 Jun - 14:22

Of all the conspiracy theories, the only one that ever had the slightest cred for me was that eavesdroppers in Cheltenham at GCHQ, which for heavens sake has had thousands (5,300 work there) of people doing nothing but following up electronic contact data since the year dot, could possibly have incriminating call data (NB not content of calls) between the major players; that they had been asked for this, by one or other police service, and that they had refused on grounds of 'national security,' because everyone has to pretend that there are no listeners, and they do not tune in to anything.

I think this was all aired on one of the earlier forums, years ago... literally... Does anyone remember whether it was the Mirror Forum, or 3As or where? Agreed the disappearance of a single child is a tiny pinprick in the great scheme of things, but if any contact data would have been useful to the police, I would like to think exceptions could have been made. As for saying it would breach 'national security'... Who is kidding whom? What do we suppose all those people are sitting there doing? Finding out useful preventative and crime-solving stuff on behalf of UK citizens, I would have thought... and hoped.

The stuff the Guardian printed about Prism is new in that it involves Internet surveillance, and the compliance of the likes of Google and Facebook and the ability to look at everyone's contact data indiscriminately, which is perturbing, and because it is American led, and possibly facilitating of back door unacknowledged so-called 'snooping' by the state. Surely individual case basde searches have always been allowed, if permission has been applied for. Whatever the other 5,000 people are listening to is anyone's educated guess.

The UK's GCHQ ihas a helpful and informative website.

GCHQ is one of the three UK Intelligence Agencies and forms a crucial part of the UK’s National Intelligence and Security machinery.
The National Security Strategy sets out the challenges of a changing and uncertain world and places cyber attack in the top tier of risks, alongside international terrorism, a major industrial accident or natural disaster, and international military crisis. GCHQ, in concert with Security Service (also known as MI5) and the Secret Intelligence Service (also known as MI6) play a key role across all of these areas and more. Our work drives the UK Government’s response to world events and enables strategic goals overseas.

GCHQ acts within the law... so now you know...

jeanmonroe Mon 10 Jun - 12:58

And wasn't it said, by Leicester Police, in answer to a Freedom of Information request 'that Madeleine McCann questions were not going to be answered, because of NATIONAL SECURITY'

She wasn't a 'mini me' Bin Laden, was she? UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question 23324

UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question 23324

comperedna Mon 10 Jun - 17:25

Ho ho ho

Fudge Tue 11 Jun - 21:47

jeanmonroe wrote:And wasn't it said, by Leicester Police, in answer to a Freedom of Information request 'that Madeleine McCann questions were not going to be answered, because of NATIONAL SECURITY'

She wasn't a 'mini me' Bin Laden, was she?

I may have remembered this incorrectly but did G Amaral ask a member of LP to be a witness for him in the earlier case with the McCanns and he said he was unable to appear because of National Security?

**tanszi** Wed 12 Jun - 0:10

that was also my understanding at the time. he wasn't allowed to appear for Dr G Amaral. jimo

**malena stool** Wed 12 Jun - 8:45

jeanmonroe wrote:And wasn't it said, by Leicester Police, in answer to a Freedom of Information request 'that Madeleine McCann questions were not going to be answered, because of NATIONAL SECURITY'

She wasn't a 'mini me' Bin Laden, was she?

The all seeing, great and illustrious, Right Honourable Gordon Brown MP said it also. Just seconds before his nose grew another 2 inches....

jeanmonroe Wed 12 Jun - 11:21

tanszi wrote:that was also my understanding at the time. he wasn't allowed to appear for Dr G Amaral. jimo

Maddie Case: British Cop invokes state secrets privilege to refuse to testify, 11 January 2010

Maddie Case: British Cop invokes state secrets privilege to refuse to testify Jornal de Notícias

UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question Josedefreitas

By Nuno Miguel Maia
11 January 2010 00h00m
Thanks to Joana Morais for translation

Trial on book about Maddie without key witness from the English investigation side

A detective sergeant from Scotland Yard invokes "State immunity" and obligation of secrecy on the investigations of the Maddie case in order to refuse to testify tomorrow, Tuesday, at the beginning of the trial that opposes the McCann couple to the former coordinator of the PJ, Gonçalo Amaral.

The hearing of witnesses tomorrow at the Civil Court of Lisbon, will be limited to the elements that were requested by the former head of the Judiciary Police of Portimão, most of which also collaborated in the investigation of the English girl's disappearance. The case concerns the order to withdraw from the market all the books "The Truth of the Lie", in which is defended the thesis of Maddie's death and the parental involvement in hiding the cadaver.

The English cop, incidentally with a Portuguese name (José de Freitas), was the liaison officer between the Portuguese and English authorities and the McCann couple. On several occasions he accompanied Kate and Gerry, who would be constituted as arguidos, after being confronted with evidence of human blood and cadaver odour in the apartment at the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz, Lagos. The traces - remember - were detected by the English dogs "Eddie" and "Keela".

As is usual in the standard procedures of the British, all the contacts and signals expressed by the McCanns were registered, including those that contributed to support the decision to constitute them as suspects. And it's relating to that, and to other data, that Gonçalo Amaral seeks a statement.

"Any potential evidence [testimonial] that I can give may be subject to confidentiality and Immunity of the English Public Interest. Furthermore, since all the services that I performed were official, the principle of State immunity is applied and it will be necessary to gain the consent of the United Kingdom authorities to waive that State immunity before I could be subject to the jurisdiction of the Portuguese courts and be able to give any evidence, whether relevant or not. The State immunity covering my official acts is that of the United Kingdom and not mine, and can not be renounced by me, but only by the United Kingdom", wrote José de Freitas to the judge of the Civil Court of Lisbon after having been notified, in a letter that JN had access.

The police officer suggests that his witness statement should be instead requested through a rogatory letter or through the British Ambassador in Portugal. But subjected to prior authorisation by the English authorities, who have just set a tight regime of secrecy of the process in England (read the next article).

jeanmonroe Wed 12 Jun - 11:29

I thought SY didn't get involved until May 2011?

After gullibles Dave and Theresa were pressured by 'our' Rebekah.

The case against G Amarals book was in January 2010.

Maybe this guy was liasion officer at the time, May 2007, in LP and then transferred to SY. (to continue/reinforce the 'charade?)

The English cop, incidentally with a Portuguese name (José de Freitas), was the liaison officer between the Portuguese and English authorities and the McCann couple. On several occasions he accompanied Kate and Gerry, ( tea and biccies no doubt, like with the LSS, when they returned from abroad with one less child than they went with, and just had to say 'she was abducted' No more questions please!) who would be constituted as arguidos, after being confronted with evidence of human blood and cadaver odour in the apartment...........

Was he liasion officer from day 1 (LP)?

don't know.

**kitti** Wed 12 Jun - 11:32

Is his witness statement in the files?

**kitti** Wed 12 Jun - 11:38

01_volume_I_o_apenso_I_Page_269

01_volume_I_o_apenso_I_Page_270

01_volume_I_o_apenso_I_Page_271

01_volume_I_o_apenso_I_Page_272
Information

With the aim of providing the Police Scientific Laboratory with the DNA profile of Madeleine McCann, in order to be able to carry out comparisons with DNA that have been identified in the examinations requested, within the sphere of collaboration that exists between the PJ and the UK authorities, I telephoned Mr Jose de Freitas, a New Scotland Yard Officer, whom I asked to email me the childs DNA profile which was determined in analyses carried out in a UK laboratory, previously referred to in a letter that is part of this process.

In reply to my request, Mr Jose de Freitas sent me the email, I am immediately sending a copy to the Director of the Scientific Police Laboratory, Sra Saudade Nunes.

Portimao 1st October 2007

Inspector Paolo Ferreira

Followed by email (with an attachment)

From Jose de Freitas
New Scotland Yard to Inspector Ferreira

Inspector Ferreira,

DNA profile of Madeleine McCann that was collected in her parents house in England.

Regards

Jose de Freitas
New Scotland Yard

jeanmonroe Wed 12 Jun - 12:02

Given the above that means that NSY were 'involved' just 5 months after Madeleines 'disappearance'

So why all the FANFARE from Mitchell, in 2011, about 'NOW(2011) we are getting the EXPERTISE of the best police force'?

Yet NSY seem to have been 'on the case' SINCE at least October 2007!

Hmmmmmm?

Sponsored content

UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question

UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question

Re: UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question

Re: UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question

Re: UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question

Re: UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question

Re: UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question

Re: UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question

Re: UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question

Re: UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question

Re: UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question

Re: UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question

Re: UK GCHQ, US Prism, eavesdropping, and the case in question