This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Hoof Hearted 14 Aug 15 11.15am | |
---|---|
MI5/MI6/Special Branch would have made him disappear in the good old days.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
johnfirewall 14 Aug 15 11.29am | |
---|---|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 13 Aug 2015 3.42pm
Quote Superfly at 13 Aug 2015 3.27pm
He must know he's facing a bit of porridge. To deter sexual predators, he's attempting to disguise himself as Noel Edmunds. Good trick, dress like one, to deter one (there is absolutely no evidence that Noel Edmunds is a sex offender, yet). If I could go bookies and have a double on those 2 I'd bang a ton on right now.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 14 Aug 15 11.38am | |
---|---|
Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Aug 2015 11.15am
MI5/MI6/Special Branch would have made him disappear in the good old days. Not really how they worked. MI5 has never really been too keen on killing people, they much preferred turning them into an asset and double agent. That's generally been how they operated through subversion. People like Assange and Wikileaks, are exactly the kind of people and organisations, that MI5 likes to infiltrate and turn. That way you have resolved the issue of Assange, and you then get everyone who then uses wikileaks. Even during wartime, MI5 was more interested in using the leverage of execution and exposure, to turn German agents into assets, as it allowed them to see what whole spy rings were doing. MI5 has always been good at the long game. You can bet that some of those Islamist websites and 'hate preachers' are MI-5 assets. That's what I would do, set up Islamist websites, and then just start tracking the people who log on, sign up and post. You only kill people who have no value or can't get to. Everyone else, you corrupt and put back into play.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
nickgusset Shizzlehurst 14 Aug 15 11.39am | |
---|---|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 13 Aug 2015 5.37pm
Quote fed up eagle at 13 Aug 2015 5.13pm
He put hundreds of thousands of servicemen and women's lives at risk by releasing what he did-ok you could argue that the politicians did that as much by starting the wars in the first place but that ain't the point. Its a popular misconception, but untrue. It was alleged by the US Military, but unproven in court. Wikileaks redacted all personal information and details from documentation and released nothing highly classified or secret (which Manning didn't have access to), the actual risk possed to service personnel from the information directly was negligible. It was however embrassing for the state, as it released information regarding incidents in which it was culpable or had concealed or obfuscated its role, notably the policy of restricting information. Manning was cleared of all counts of 'aiding the enemy' and 'espionage' charges. Its a very popular misconception floated around, in the media, but in fact non of the information leaked was of value to the enemy (and none of it appears to have been used by the enemy either).
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 14 Aug 15 11.53am | |
---|---|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 14 Aug 2015 11.38am
MI5 has always been good at the long game. You can bet that some of those Islamist websites and 'hate preachers' are MI-5 assets. That's what I would do, set up Islamist websites, and then just start tracking the people who log on, sign up and post. You only kill people who have no value or can't get to. Everyone else, you corrupt and put back into play.
I should imagine the real 'hard core' are well aware of these traps.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
fed up eagle Between Horley, Surrey and Preston... 14 Aug 15 1.22pm | |
---|---|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 13 Aug 2015 5.37pm
Quote fed up eagle at 13 Aug 2015 5.13pm
He put hundreds of thousands of servicemen and women's lives at risk by releasing what he did-ok you could argue that the politicians did that as much by starting the wars in the first place but that ain't the point. Its a popular misconception, but untrue. It was alleged by the US Military, but unproven in court. Wikileaks redacted all personal information and details from documentation and released nothing highly classified or secret (which Manning didn't have access to), the actual risk possed to service personnel from the information directly was negligible. It was however embrassing for the state, as it released information regarding incidents in which it was culpable or had concealed or obfuscated its role, notably the policy of restricting information. Manning was cleared of all counts of 'aiding the enemy' and 'espionage' charges. Its a very popular misconception floated around, in the media, but in fact non of the information leaked was of value to the enemy (and none of it appears to have been used by the enemy either).
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 14 Aug 15 1.30pm | |
---|---|
Quote Stirlingsays at 14 Aug 2015 11.53am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 14 Aug 2015 11.38am
MI5 has always been good at the long game. You can bet that some of those Islamist websites and 'hate preachers' are MI-5 assets. That's what I would do, set up Islamist websites, and then just start tracking the people who log on, sign up and post. You only kill people who have no value or can't get to. Everyone else, you corrupt and put back into play.
I should imagine the real 'hard core' are well aware of these traps. MI5 have no power of arrest and as such, entrapment laws work very differently from those of the police, customs and special branch. Evidence obtain by MI5 is not used in a court of law. Also Agents don't engage much in field work, assets do, and of course proving someone is an MI5 asset is very difficult. Think of it like this. MI5 sets up a Islamist website, through an asset (probably paid), that asset collects information which it passes back to MI5, they process information, spot targets share information, put targets under surveillance and then Special Branch go out and obtain enough evidence for a warrant, and conduct a raid if necessary. The website remains intact, the asset in place and continues. MI5 and the asset probably don't even end up in court, as special branch have investigated information passed to them, found sufficient evidence to obtain a warrant and acted. As for the Hardcore, probably groups evolve as they become aware. But that's why you have 'numerous' in. Of course those that you picked up, you also have the option of 'turning them', and putting them back out into the field as assets. A lot of intelligence is 'proactive' rather than reactive. Certain criminals are allowed to 'function' because they become protected assets. You might allow people who are trafficking people into the UK, as pass if they pass on details of suspects and so on. Edited by jamiemartin721 (14 Aug 2015 1.45pm)
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 14 Aug 15 1.41pm | |
---|---|
Quote fed up eagle at 14 Aug 2015 1.22pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 13 Aug 2015 5.37pm
Quote fed up eagle at 13 Aug 2015 5.13pm
He put hundreds of thousands of servicemen and women's lives at risk by releasing what he did-ok you could argue that the politicians did that as much by starting the wars in the first place but that ain't the point. Its a popular misconception, but untrue. It was alleged by the US Military, but unproven in court. Wikileaks redacted all personal information and details from documentation and released nothing highly classified or secret (which Manning didn't have access to), the actual risk possed to service personnel from the information directly was negligible. It was however embrassing for the state, as it released information regarding incidents in which it was culpable or had concealed or obfuscated its role, notably the policy of restricting information. Manning was cleared of all counts of 'aiding the enemy' and 'espionage' charges. Its a very popular misconception floated around, in the media, but in fact non of the information leaked was of value to the enemy (and none of it appears to have been used by the enemy either).
That's the point, they couldn't prove intent (the establishment of 'actus rae' and 'mens rae' are essential for proving a crime. You can't try people for which they might do, or had a chance to do, only for what they did. The requirement of criminal law is proof beyond reasonable doubt that they did something. Most of Manning's conviction and sentence stems from violation of military codes. Also, some of the information he, now she, leaked was most certainly classifiable as being of public interest. Most of it demonstrated the military abuse of security classification as a means of 'image protection' But yes, he broke laws he now she, signed up to willingly and freely, and should have been held accountable to them.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stuk Top half 05 Feb 16 12.52pm | |
---|---|
Still a c***. And the UN have made themselves look like complete t***s too. Evading bail and hiding in an embassy isn't being detained. Walk out and we'll show you what detained is.
Optimistic as ever |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
elgrande bedford 05 Feb 16 1.57pm | |
---|---|
And let's not forget he,s accused of rape......that is why he decided to "hide away" in the embassy.
always a Norwood boy, where ever I live. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
matt_himself Matataland 05 Feb 16 2.16pm | |
---|---|
I have read that the crime Assange is accused of is allegedly 'changing lanes without indicating'.
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
johnfirewall 05 Feb 16 3.05pm | |
---|---|
Definitely did it. And I said that before he turned in to an albino Noel Edmonds. That concludes the findings of the Lewisham Working Group on R^pey Looking Bstards.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.