Newmedia on Tue, 12 Oct 1999 08:33:05 +0200 (CEST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> echelon keyword inadequacies


Yes!  Finally something intelligent about intelligence!  Congratulations. 

The UKUSA agreement is *not* the USAUK agreement.  Priority.  Who's on

What's on second.

U.S. intelligence has been a subsidiary of British intelligence from the
days that MI-6/SOE established and ran the OSS.  Not the other way around. 
Even as it grew complicated and fractioned and self-warring, it has never
changed its essential character. 

To this day, the British "Official Secrets Act" applies in the U.S.  This
is one reason why the foreign service records from the U.S. State
Department have still have not been published from the 1950's. Despite
U.S. "law." 

Even Scientology (U.S. Naval Intelligence) vs. the World Federation of
Mental Health (British Intelligence/Tavistock) is just another gang vs.
counter-gang in good old British psy-ops Mau-Mau fashion. 

Read "Desparate Deception" by Thomas Mohl.  The Americans were (and are)
the "fools" in this game. 

The idea, in Euro-circles, that the U.S. has subverted and taken over the
line of "secret services" stretching back from London to Venice to Persia
is, no doubt . . . comforting.  But, silly. 

Forget the "Californian Ideology."  WIRED is and always was "English

If you wish to mess with British intelligence -- i.e. ECHELON -- you must
think British.  And, naval.  And, imperial.  Like the British.  Just as
Scot has suggested. 


Mark Stahlman

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: contact: