Not “Ridiculous Nonsense” Anymore: Yes, British Intelligence and Others Did Spy on Trump Campaign Using the 14 Eyes Program

by Scott Creighton

After listening to a month’s worth of the complicit media yelling their outrage at Sean Spicer, Devin Nunes, Judge Napolitano, Donald Trump and all the other “conspiracy theorists” (myself included) who dared suggest it was even slightly possible that British intelligence agencies used the 5 Eyes program to spy on the Trump campaign staff in the lead-up to the election and then share that information with the Obama administration (who at the time was working as a surrogate for the Hillary team) today we have confirmation that, yes, GCHQ and other British intel services did in fact spy on team Trump and share the information they collected with Obama. And it predates the “Russian hacking” bull crap.

The narrative being sculpted is that the Brits were simply assisting in the ongoing investigation into the “Russian hacking” story but the truth is, their intel dates back to late 2015… long before the “Russian hacking” narrative.

The Guardian, who broke this story, say “It is understood that GCHQ was at no point carrying out a targeted operation against Trump or his team or proactively seeking information..” and that is it in terms of providing any substantial evidence at all that they weren’t deliberately targeting the Trump campaign staff during the election process looking for juicy info they could feed Obama and American intelligence services to use against him in the election.

Turns out, a number of foreign agencies had their hands in the effort to thwart the Trump candidacy and Russia wasn’t one of them.

Continue reading

Advertisements

UK government quietly rewrites hacking laws to give GCHQ, police, and other intelligence officers immunity

from ARS

The UK government has quietly passed new legislation that exempts GCHQ, police, and other intelligence officers from prosecution for hacking into computers and mobile phones.

While major or controversial legislative changes usually go through normal parliamentary process (i.e. democratic debate) before being passed into law, in this case an amendment to the Computer Misuse Act was snuck in under the radar as secondary legislation. According to Privacy International, “It appears no regulators, commissioners responsible for overseeing the intelligence agencies, the Information Commissioner’s Office, industry, NGOs or the public were notified or consulted about the proposed legislative changes… There was no public debate.”

Privacy International also suggests that the change to the law was in direct response to a complaint that it filed last year. In May 2014, Privacy International and seven communications providers filed a complaint with the UK Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), asserting that GCHQ’s hacking activities were unlawful under the Computer Misuse Act.

[read more here]