Fork Movements and GCHQ

By 21 March 2017REVISIONS IN PROGRESS
Fork Movements and GCHQ-imgs

Fork Movements and GCHQ (±x)

Published on 21st March 2017
Joseph-S-R-de-Saram

Joseph S R de Saram (JSRDS)

Information Security Architect / Intelligence Analyst / Computer Scientist / Human Rights Activist / COMSEC / SIGINT / TSCM
408

Enter more text here

What is a Fork Movement?

In chess, a fork is a tactic whereby a single piece makes two or more direct attacks simultaneously. Most commonly two pieces are threatened, which is also sometimes called a double attack. The attacker usually aims to gain material by capturing one of the opponent’s pieces. The defender often finds it difficult to counter two or more threats in a single move. The attacking piece is called the forking piece; the pieces attacked are said to be forked. A piece that is defended can still said to be forked if the forking piece has a lower value.

Besides attacking pieces, a target of a fork can be a direct mating threat (for example, attacking an unprotected knight while simultaneously setting up a battery of queen and bishop to threaten mate). Or a target can be an implied threat (for example, a knight may attack an unprotected piece while simultaneously threaten to fork queen and rook).

Forks are often used as part of a combination which may involve other types of chess tactics as well.

UK Government Communications Headquarters

I first heard about GCHQ from Major Malcolm R Wade who taught me Geography at Barlborough Hall School from 1982 onwards. Major Wade would always provide my classmates in Elements A with interesting anecdotes about his life in military intelligence – they started with the phrase “When I was in the Army…”

He never stated anything about operational issues of Signals Intelligence (“SIGINT”) however and that is the way it needed to be.

Fast forward to the recent past – I have had a lot of respect for the talented individuals at GCHQ who are undoubtedly the finest in the world. Notwithstanding that the NSA has far better equipment and their computing power out of their Utah Datacenter is absolutely phenomenal, each GCHQ guy outshines their NSA counterpart.

As such it is always sad to see how politics gets in the way of Counter-Terrorism, and the almost casual way that nowadays intelligence agencies and law enforcement allow themselves to be used as bitches to curry favour or validation by politicians.

Sudden Resignation of GCHQ Director Robert Hannigan

I was quite disappointed by this odd move, as Hannigan was instrumental in effecting a major policy shift within GCHQ, more akin to Mikhail Gorbachev’s ‘glasnost’ in the 1980s.

However in the above article the interesting paragraph is:-

“His sudden resignation – he informed staff just hours before making this decision public – prompted speculation that it might be related to British concerns over shared intelligence with the US in the wake of Donald Trump becoming president.”

The usual provision of US/CA/NZ/AU/UK intelligence data via legitimate request would not lead to a resignation.

I do not know the real reasons for his resignation and speculation is inconclusive most of the time. Given my own experience working with intelligence officers via obfuscated routes, it is entirely helpful in the event of a future investigation, if parties who may have been involved in mis/malfeasance are not around to be questioned when ‘the sh*t hits the fan’.

However the following audio recordings confirm that GCHQ DOES appear to be providing classified intelligence data to third parties outside the official channels.

Sleepless in Sri Lanka thanks to Surveillance

The following audio recordings are between Iain Jones and I, and it is absolutely clear that specific keywords have been used to generate interest and/or suspicion against me. Clearly I identified it at the time and just carried on my investigations against Jones to see where it was all going. As I have correctly identified the position, only a fool would then rely on my statements as probable cause – therein lies the problem.

20151129 – Keywords GCHQ; FIVE NAMES;

20151011 – Keywords GCHQ; SCOTLAND YARD; SURVEILLANCE; CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION;

20151004 – Keywords ADRIAN; SINGAPORE; FAKE CELL TOWERS; 15,000; CID; HARASSMENT; CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION; INJUNCTION; PHONE INTERCEPTION; PERSON OF INTEREST

20151004 – Keywords ADRIAN; SINGAPORE; FAKE CELL TOWERS; 15,000; CID; HARASSMENT; CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION; INJUNCTION; PHONE INTERCEPTION; PERSON OF INTEREST

Sadly no-one bothered to help me and not even one month later on 22 October 2015, I was involved in the staged Road Traffic Accident, which led to my neck being broken as well as the planting of surveillance equipment in my home.

20150925 – Keywords MISSION; AUGUSTA VENTURES; UK; SIMON THOMPSON; AUSTRALIA; DESPERATE; CRIMINAL ACTIVITY; HANDLING STOLEN GOODS; PERJURY; DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE; SELF-DESTRUCTIVE BEHAVIOUR; MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE TREATY; COURT ORDER; MLAT; INJUNCTION; ARTICLES ON GOOGLE; A CAUSE; CID; VOYAGE OF DISCOVERY; OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE; ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT; CRIMINAL ACTIVITY; HARASSMENT SURVEILLANCE; PHONE TO ENGLAND

20150913 – Keywords WELL-FUNDED; MARGARET [CUNNIFFE]; SH*T-STIRRED; SCOTLAND YARD, HM CUSTOMS & EXCISE; GCHQ; ‘ANOTHER CALL’; AMATEURS; TERRORISTS; COMMERCIAL; PROPRIETARY PROPERTY; PATENT THEFT; NO CRIMINAL ISSUES; CHAIN OF EVIDENCE; AUTHORITIES; CLEVER STUFF; VEHICLES AND PAPERWORK; INCOME AND TAX IS PERFECT; DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL; SURVEILLANCE; GOING BACK TO THE UK; WIFE

I have also recovered recordings from February 2014 and these confirm similar statements from well before the current investigations commenced. It never ceases to amaze me that all the evidence that incriminated law enforcement had been mysteriously wiped in late 2015 🙂

Fork Movements and how to Quash Authorisations

These (and other) audio recordings demonstrate:-

(a) Jones (a civilian with no security clearances) confirms repeatedly that GCHQ provides him with classified intelligence data on myself and four others per his instructions; and

(b) Jones has been acting in the capacity of an agent of law enforcement, attempting to establish suspicion and/or probable cause, and using his credibility for future authorisations and warrants.

What would happen?

GCHQ would immediately disassociate itself from Jones and his statements, saying that they are simply untrue and Jones is not credible and his statements should not to be relied upon. Traditionally GCHQ has not commented on any of its operations but its recent rebuttal of the Donald Trump allegations confirms the new norm. I hope to hear from them when further recordings are released 🙂

Unfortunately Jones’ statements have already been used for authorisations against me, including but not limited to surveillance, search and seizure (I think Metropolitan Police Service / National Crime Agency / HMRC) which is a serious issue for them in the light of my data recovery…

Full and frank disclosure is one of the prerequisites of ex-parte applications, and notwithstanding that Jones’ claims to have a backdoor into GCHQ, his reliability as a witness is also non-existent for a variety of other reason, including but not limited to money laundering. I will publish those later 🙂

In effect I am ensuring that GCHQ defends its credibility by completely destroying Jones’ credibility. And Jones’ ‘credibility’ is the bedrock of law enforcement’s probable cause and its authorisations and derivative works.

And in fact I would ensure that GCHQ, MPS and NCA are dragged before the judge to be cross-examined on MY evidence – this is not the same as Section 56 of RIPA 2016 in which they cannot be cross-examined on THEIR evidence 🙂

This is the nature of the ‘Fork Movement’ as assertions made at (a) and (b) above cannot exist at the same time – my adversaries will lose a piece regardless of any steps that they take. Although I would replace the words ‘will lose a piece’ with the words ‘are in a real mess’.

Furthermore military intelligence and national security issues always ‘trump’ (pardon the pun) law enforcement investigations, so it is really not rocket science that law enforcement is in my sights…

Given the fact that law enforcement have also negligently/fraudulently actioned strategies based on the perjury of the Melbourne Fraudsters, directly resulting in significant damage to me and my asset position, I am simply going to respond ‘using my own intelligence’ 🙂

At present this multi-jurisdictional fraud against me is nothing short of ridiculous, and I have sufficient experience working with the best to describe a live criminal investigation as my ‘adventures’ on LinkedIn!

I do hope that parties in Australia, Singapore, United Kingdom, Hong Kong and Sri Lanka will ‘wake up and smell the coffee’ before I decide this should be a major international incident…

Joseph-S-R-de-Saram

Joseph S R de Saram (JSRDS)

Information Security Architect / Intelligence Analyst / Computer Scientist / Human Rights Activist / COMSEC / SIGINT / TSCM
RHODIUM GROUP