MI5's 2000 terror suspects

[fela fan]

The 2000 figure relates to suspects currently engaged in active support for Islamist terrorism.

So why give them bloody visas and let them into the country if they're actively supporting terrorism?? Why?? And i might add it is NOT islamist terrorism, if it was you'd have malaysia and indonesia bombing our country.

Are you aware of the difficulties for ordinary folk from non-developed world countries in securing visas to get into the UK? How come these suspected terrorists are so easily let into the UK? My mate's wife, WIFE, was refused a visa for a holiday. That is just the tip of the iceberg.

 

[untethered]

So why give them bloody visas and let them into the country if they're actively supporting terrorism?? Why?? And i might add it is NOT islamist terrorism, if it was you'd have malaysia and indonesia bombing our country.

Are you aware of the difficulties for ordinary folk from non-developed world countries in securing visas to get into the UK? How come these suspected terrorists are so easily let into the UK? My mate's wife, WIFE, was refused a visa for a holiday. That is just the tip of the iceberg.

I assume that the majority of the 2000 are British and live here as citizens, rather than are visiting foriegners.

 

[fela fan]

I assume that the majority of the 2000 are British and live here as citizens, rather than are visiting foriegners.

Reading the report from the OP, you could easily say it was half and half.

But whatever the figure, why give them bloody visas?? Especially in the knowledge that ordinary folk from the 'wrong' countries (and that will most certainly include pakistan) have such difficulty in getting one for a holiday.

 

[fela fan]

Those of Pakistani heritage may well. Why shouldn't they? Surprising degree of ethnocentricity / institutional racism being displayed there ...

Why shouldn't they go there for a holiday?? Indeed...

"However, the head of Pakistan's National Crisis Management Centre, Brigadier Javed Iqbal Cheema, said anyone "who spends a lot of money and travels to Pakistan...[is] already motivated for a particular reason"."

I don't think he's talking about holidays.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6610209.stm

 

[zoltan]

dupppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

 

[zoltan]

If it's normal practice to detail politicians, then i'd say that MI5 and various other establishments have power over the polis, and in effect tell them what to do re policy. Great, that's democracy for you.

And if it's true that MI5 had files on one million people, then 2000 is fucking chicken feed and should not tax their resources one iota. So how do you explain what you said here:

"I can tell you that the MI lot are utterly snowed under and close to breaking point - they are shipping back peeps from fat overseas postings to try to get things under control in the UK - not that Im saying the threat is any worse, but the physical number of people being watched is massive."

If they're snowed under over just a mere 2000, how could they have files on 1 million???

I will attemopt to assist you in answersing your questions, but please keep it civil.

Files does not mean watched.

as I said, the security services will have files on "all" public figures - not becasue they are subversives, but becasue they could be targets - even for something like blackmail - this is just admin - the files compiled for every MP are updated with their implicit knowledge, if not participation.The ethos behind this is expressly not to use it for leverage at a later date.Admin is not field work.

The physical rescources needed to watch a suspect is mind boggling - if its a high level target, then its 24 hours a day, - imagine the organisation. the shifts,. the cover , the vehicles needed to do this.

there has been heavy recruitment of Surv. people in the past few years, but the intelligence (ha!) lot that sift through these millions of facts need long and ongoing training. You can train someone up to snoop according to orders relatively quickly, but thats all they do - they provide raw info only - they dont make any decisions - they skulk and monitor.You need trained people to analyse that information and decide what is relavant and what is not and given the volume of raw info coming in, this is where the spooks are stretched.

The fact they they now have an effective unlimited buidget will help, but it will take years to get people in the right places - there is a bottle neck at the minute.

This isnt supprrt or critisism of the security servcies, its just a statment of current fact.

 

[zoltan]

nnnn

sorry, the board seemed to hva ewent mad and ive duiped this post

 

[fela fan]

That's one big stutter you've got there mate!

 

[fela fan]

It seems appropriate to ask you zoltan: how many people are employed by MI5?

 

[fela fan]

I will attemopt to assist you in answersing your questions, but please keep it civil.

Files does not mean watched.

as I said, the security services will have files on "all" public figures - not becasue they are subversives, but becasue they could be targets - even for something like blackmail - this is just admin - the files compiled for every MP are updated with their implicit knowledge, if not participation.The ethos behind this is expressly not to use it for leverage at a later date.Admin is not field work.

The physical rescources needed to watch a suspect is mind boggling - if its a high level target, then its 24 hours a day, - imagine the organisation. the shifts,. the cover , the vehicles needed to do this.

Files on all public figures?? To help them? Targets of who? What or who is going to target rock stars, movie stars, big brother stars, football stars? And how will surveillance of these stars actually help them should they become blackmailed or whatever?

And as for watching a suspect for 24 hours, surely that only needs two people: 12 hour shifts? Maybe four, in couples to keep each other company like.

I thought MI5 was about watching those who potentially could harm the country, not about taking care of public figures who might be harmed.

 

[zoltan]

Probabaly about 3K directly at the minute - but not all of them are field - you need a big support staffing level to cope with this - someone to book the flight/ to arrange the hotels etc etc etc .Some are Trainers - HR on steriods so to speak - psycologists etc .

The levels of paid casuals is unknown - these could range from scouse skag street dealers to senior gang/ Paramilitary members - you cant get an idea of these chaps numbers - some indeed dont get paid.

 

[zoltan]

Files on all public figures?? To help them? Targets of who? What or who is going to target rock stars, movie stars, big brother stars, football stars? And how will surveillance of these stars actually help them should they become blackmailed or whatever?

And as for watching a suspect for 24 hours, surely that only needs two people: 12 hour shifts? Maybe four, in couples to keep each other company like.

I thought MI5 was about watching those who potentially could harm the country, not about taking care of public figures who might be harmed.

How would you feel if a deputy PM for example was being blackmailed due to his private life/ sexuality ?

They dont care about Craig from Big Brother, but they do care about union leaders who could be swayed by threats and use their block power to take a favoured postion on some issue .

As I said the "idea" is not to keep these files to expert pressure at some unspecified point in the future, but should someone of power later find himself in a corner and it may have a knock on effect of the security of the country, then they have the details to hand.This is an excercise in intelligence gathering - is not a Stasi / Securitate method of keeping people in line by recording their dirty secrets and unwashed laudry. Apparently.

Also - I think you are making light of the Surv. aspect - have a think about it seriously and you shoulf see why it is such a massive logistical operation - have you ever tried to find "average" nondescript looking people who you wouldnt remember again ? its fuckin hard!

 

[el-ahrairah]

how do you know so much about it zoltan?

 

[zoltan]

how do you know so much about it zoltan?

Im not, if thats wot your asking! I have principles !

 

[zoltan]

Regarding the numbers being watched ( apparently )

I wish I could pull the relavant stuff from the Carlos Marighellas Minimanual or Ches Guerilla warfare, but I dont have them with me 24/7 ( surprisingly, as it may casue problems should the filth pull me over at my London BR station one morning ), but there is a very vbasic mathematical formula for the amount of support/ symphasisers you need to carry on a campaign - even of these supporters have nothing to do with the activities, but, for example, drop off a suitcase of clothes or a letter at an address or are asked to change some money at a FX booth in London - many many of the "watched" will be at this level and obviously 99.99999999999999999999999999999% of their lives are 9-5 normality - it doesnt mean that there are 2000 gun toting armed to the teeth Jihadists wating for their rallying call. It may mean there are a handful- but they know a mate of a mate will put them up for a night no questions asked if they are in Luton at short notice for example.

Much of the turgid Surv work produces little or nothing - precisely becvase there is so little going on most of the time.

Look at Che's sorry tale in Bolivia to see how the organisations collapsed when deprived of active support

 

[untethered]

but there is a very vbasic mathematical formula for the amount of support/ symphasisers you need to carry on a campaign - even of these supporters have nothing to do with the activities, but, for example, drop off a suitcase of clothes or a letter at an address or are asked to change some money at a FX booth in London - many many of the "watched" will be at this level and obviously 99.99999999999999999999999999999% of their lives are 9-5 normality - it doesnt mean that there are 2000 gun toting armed to the teeth Jihadists wating for their rallying call. It may mean there are a handful- but they know a mate of a mate will put them up for a night no questions asked if they are in Luton at short notice for example.

This is the "pyramid of support" for any terrorist organisation or network.

Those at the bottom of the network have no direct contact with the terrorists themselves at all. They are engaged in political activities, fundraising and things of that nature.

 

[zoltan]

This is the "pyramid of support" for any terrorist organisation or network.

Those at the bottom of the network have no direct contact with the terrorists themselves at all. They are engaged in political activities, fundraising and things of that nature.

wot you said

 

[detective-boy]

I doubt it's down to hysterical journos as DB put it, rather that such stories are deliberately fed to them.

They didn;t have 24 hour rolling news then - there were hours between an event and a deadline usually, time for facts to be established and factual updates to be provided. Nowadays everything is speculated on and exaggerated instantly to fill another five minute slot with something new, ten minutes after the last one ...

I know - they keep wanting me to add to it (two more refusals today ...)

 

[detective-boy]

The physical rescources needed to watch a suspect is mind boggling - if its a high level target, then its 24 hours a day, - imagine the organisation. the shifts,. the cover , the vehicles needed to do this.

Bollocks. June Ackfield did it on her own, in full uniform, for hours on end and with a marked panda car in The Bill ... you're just swallowing the establishment's bullshit ...


ETA: Told you!

And as for watching a suspect for 24 hours, surely that only needs two people:

 

[zoltan]

Bollocks. June Ackfield did it on her own, in full uniform, for hours on end and with a marked panda car in The Bill ... you're just swallowing the establishment's bullshit ...


ETA: Told you!

Grrr

seriously - up to 40 people needed for a full on 24 hour surv. - those phones dont tap themselves you know

 

[detective-boy]

- those phones dont tap themselves you know

I've posted on here dozens of times about just how resource intensive surveillance is ... and then there is the question of researching and analysing the information obtained. Sadly none of this seems to deter the posters who know better (not that they ever rise to the challenge of telling us where these massive edifices are, containing thousands and thousands of analysts, working 24-7 watching every minute of CCTV recording; spotting patterns amongst millions of ANPR records; listening to hours and hours of phone intercept material; reading billions of e-mails and text messages .... ).

 

[fela fan]

Sadly none of this seems to deter the posters who know better (not that they ever rise to the challenge of telling us where these massive edifices are, containing thousands and thousands of analysts, working 24-7 watching every minute of CCTV recording; spotting patterns amongst millions of ANPR records; listening to hours and hours of phone intercept material; reading billions of e-mails and text messages .... ).

No DB, i'm almost certain that's not true. Either your memory's faulty or mine is.

I've definitely discussed this more than a few times, and feel certain you were one of the posters on one of those occasions. Maybe i should not say 'discuss' rather, try to debate. From memory you flunked it! Anyhow apologies if i've not mentioned to you before, but here i go again:

Question: what do you know about echelon? Coz officially it's not supposed to exist, but many well know that it does exist. I'm sure you at least accepted that.

As for collating and analysing the data collected by this supercomputer, i'd imagine that it's rather like looking for things in google, just type a few pertinent words, and bingo, the search is narrowed. Certainly no need to do what you say:

"containing thousands and thousands of analysts, working 24-7 watching every minute of CCTV recording; spotting patterns amongst millions of ANPR records; listening to hours and hours of phone intercept material; reading billions of e-mails and text messages"

Any answers here?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Echelon would not require one supercomputer, it'd require thousands, JUST for (unencrypted) email which is the simplest one. Looking for things in google? Do you know how meta data is made? Trust me it's not by computer it's by hand. You don't understand the subject, will you listen to those that do?

 

[weltweit]

I think I read that it can take up to 60 MI5 people to fully watch one suspect. Thus 2,000 suspects requires a lot of security services people just to maintain a level of surveilance on them.

 

[detective-boy]

Any answers here?

You're right. You have totally denied the validity of anything I have said previously. I am sure you will again. Clearly you (who has, so far as I know, never conducted any conventional or technical surveillance) know far, far more about it that me (who has done both ad fucking nauseum).

Yes. I have heard of Echelon.

Yes. I am perfectly well aware that there are systems set up to react to trigger words.

But what the fuck do you think happens then? Say we put "bomb" in this post and it triggered an electronic hit. Does the fucking computer work out who I am? And who you are? And what U75 is? And who's behind it? And what else is posted here that maybe hasn't triggered a hit? And research us? And research all our associates? And start / update any files on us?

No. It doesn't. Researchers and analysts do that. Where the fuck are they?

 

[detective-boy]

You don't understand the subject, will you listen to those that do?

No. fela fan doesn't believe in experts so he's hardly likely to believe in people with a bit of practical experience, is he?

 

[fela fan]

No. fela fan doesn't believe in experts so he's hardly likely to believe in people with a bit of practical experience, is he?

Here you go in to your perceived understandings of other posters, and in the one above you go throwing toys out the pram. All in reply to rather a civil post.

Oh well. It's a pity, coz you were beginning to make sense in your answer, especially when i know that echelon exists, but don't know how it works.

It pays to be civil if you want people to listen to you.

 

[fela fan]

I think I read that it can take up to 60 MI5 people to fully watch one suspect. Thus 2,000 suspects requires a lot of security services people just to maintain a level of surveilance on them.

Others have said 40, so lets split that and your figure weltweit and call it 50. Nice for the maths.

That means for 2000 suspects, we now need 100,000 MI5 agents just to be following these particular potential threats to the crown and nation. How many people work for this organisation??

It's beginning to look like this 2000 figure has been plucked out of thin air...

 

[zoltan]

Others have said 40, so lets split that and your figure weltweit and call it 50. Nice for the maths.

That means for 2000 suspects, we now need 100,000 MI5 agents just to be following these particular potential threats to the crown and nation. How many people work for this organisation??

It's beginning to look like this 2000 figure has been plucked out of thin air...

sometimes you come across as rational, other times.....

 

[fela fan]

sometimes you come across as rational, other times.....

Good! The least i can be pigeon-holed the better. It's the cause of so much bullshit and suffering and nastiness in this world, and responsible for the division of people, rather than unity.

I might add though zoltan, that sometimes i write in reaction to what others are saying, and therefore what i write is sometimes a result of what they have written.

That hopefully makes sense, but i'll understand if it don't.