6 ms·

Open-source intelligence challenges state monopolies on information - except, in some cases it doesn't. To take the example of Bellingcat/Higgins, their site de

by gpcr1949 5y ago

Open-source intelligence challenges state monopolies on information - except, in some cases it doesn't. To take the example of Bellingcat/Higgins, their site definitely has a certain political orientation that usually tends to align with NATO interests, for example when it comes to Syria or various Russian operations. Several of their employees have backgrounds in intelligence/military (Kaszeta, Biggers), some of their funding comes from state-linked sources (Such as the NED[0]). I also recall reading some Bellingcat article where the information was not open source, relying on some leaked database of russian passports instead [1], which is fair enough as journalism, but not open source. I'm not saying the conclusions of Bellingcat et al are necessarily wrong (though personally i take some of what they are writing with a grain of salt), but I would doubt that open source intelligence groups are necessarily that anti systemic or a challenge to state directed information flows and embargos. Finally, here is a fairly interesting article with a critical view of the Bellingcat group [2], though the source, Mintpress, is quite biased so critical reading is advised. [0] https://www.bellingcat.com/about/ https://www.bellingcat.com/about/ [1] https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2018/10/09/full-report-skripal-poisoning-suspect-dr-alexander-mishkin-hero-russia/ https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2018/10/09/ful... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26772184 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26772184

mhh__ 5y ago
Personally I've never really been under the impression that bellingcat were strictly neutral, I mostly buy that they get tipped off and then rejustify the story using OSINT sometimes, but let's not forget that they have published information which is embarrassing to the US. See the recent story on procedures on nuclear bases leaking from flashcard apps for example.
- mandmandam 5y ago
  > they have published information which is embarrassing to the US Any examples that doesn't directly attack fossil fuel competitors?
  - HDMI_Cable 5y ago
    > Any examples that doesn't directly attack fossil fuel competitors? No offence, but that is moving the goalposts a bit; information critical of the US is still critical of the US.
  - mhh__ 5y ago
    Nuclear bombs not reactors
bishoprook2 5y ago
> their site definitely has a certain political orientation that usually tends to align with NATO interests, It seems to me that if a site presents any threat to the ruling class, you simply see your Paypal access disappear, VISA accounts go away, hosting goes away, ability to make a public case via FB/Twitter/etc. goes down the memory hole, 'kept' reporters attack you, MSM mobs you, so I'm not surprised. The last half decade has made the real game as plain as day.
mdp2021 5y ago
Pluralism of investigation may be preferable (to the public) to monopoly of investigation. The matter is still part of the problem of the crisis in journalism - the difficulties of financing in new market models, and the ease of compromises with powers, hinder investigative journalism. Even recognition of its core mandate as a value is in crisis.
bredren 5y ago
> where the information was not open source, relying on some leaked database of russian passports instead If the information Was reasonably obtainable by anyone, I would flag this as grey literature. That is OSINT.
IfOnlyYouKnew 5y ago
That mintpress site is shady af, from zero transparency into funding sources to the impossible-to-deny red flag of attributing stories to writers who immediately deny all involvement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MintPress_News https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MintPress_News And trying to triangulate the truth somewhere between them and Bellingcat works about as well as a Tesla trying to triangulate between the highway exit and continuing in its lane. As but one example: either Assad dropped chemical weapons on his citizens, or the rebels did. The former is supported by famous fans of US imperialism like the UN, Doctors’ without Borders, Amnesty, the EU. and the reality that Assad was generally known to posses those weapons and delivery capabilities. Taking the other side are Putin, Assad, and, probably, Glen Greenwald.
- mandmandam 5y ago
  I consider MPN far less shady than Fox, CBS, NBC, WaPo, or the NYT. It's really nice to have a news source that applies a modicum of skepticism to America's "foreign policy". From your link: > "BuzzFeed News in 2013 described the site as having "an agenda that lines up, from its sympathy with the Syrian regime to its hostility to Sunni Saudi Arabia, with that of the Islamic Republic of Iran." If we're talking about bias; how biased is it to claim that since MPN don't agree with regime change in Syria, and they don't go along with America's (twisted beyond belief) "friendliness" towards SA, they must be working for Iran? And, isn't it weird that the wiki page makes no attempt to link to any of MPN's responses to such claims? Looking over a recent one makes a lot of the claims made in your comment and in the linked wiki page look ridiculous - https://www.mintpressnews.com/a-biased-newsguard-honors-mintpress-with-red-rating-heres-our-point-by-point-response/258499/ https://www.mintpressnews.com/a-biased-newsguard-honors-mint...
  - mrobot 5y ago
    Yes, i don't think people realize just how ruthlessly enforced alignment with US foreign policy goals is on Wikipedia. In matters of foreign governments and current events related to war, Wikipedia is essentially a propaganda page of the CIA. Very few editors control exercise real control over the foreign policy information on Wikipedia. It is not the democratic neutral source that people see it as, and that's part of why it's a good propaganda tool. It is kind of a Trojan horse into your trust boundaries. If you watch some of the edit wars when a big event happens in the news, you can often see very useful information (with sources) being thrown away. It's not really possible to get information on there that conflicts with the current military goals, because that would upset the mission.
toofy 5y ago
Regardless of your feelings on Bellingcat, none of that changes the fact that, us (the community) having access to more information and more tools at our disposal to analyze this information is a far better outcome than governments locking it away. It is quite literally—as the headline says, challenging the governments (and i’d toss in corporations as well) monopolies on certain types of information. Even if you don’t personally like Bellingcat, feed us more information, not less. The more information we have access to, the more difficult it is for authoritarian governments to run propaganda against us. Also, yeah, I think you may have been drastically understating when you mention mint being biased. There are surely sites which are critical of open source research institutes like Bellingcat that will have a far better track record than somewhere like mint who have had multiple bouts of absolutely bonkers and absurd propaganda for brutal dictators and brutal regimes. Of course they’re against OSINT. We need far more open source intelligence research not less.
- mrobot 5y ago
  Organizations like Bellingcat are really just sort of less-than-professional press outlets for the intelligence agencies. The information is controlled, the interpretation is biased because of spook affiliation at the highest levels, and they can be more sloppy than official government agencies with the information that is available to inject some narrative into public opinion without it actually being fact. They can wave off any harm they do. Some of these organizations make absolutely wild conclusions based on very limited info like looking up buildings on google earth and assuming they are some type of building, making some crazy conclusion like such and such number of prisoners somewhere. If you're worried about brutality, you might want to look up what US sanctions on Syria are actually doing to the people there. They can't eat. They have no heat. No gas. We are stealing their oil. Do you think the Syrian people might see us as an authoritarian government? Because they are suffering, we are causing it, there's nothing they can do, and the situation is enforced by violence.
  - noduerme 5y ago
    Really? You can't draw some conclusions about the number of Uighur prisoners in Chinese camps, based on satellite evidence? Oh, right, they're Sunni. We shouldn't put sanctions on Assad when he drops barrel bombs on his own civilians? Oh, wait, they were Sunnis. Wikipedia is controlled by the US intelligence agencies? Don't make me laugh. You want pure Shia propaganda from Assad and the Ayatollah, trust MintPress. Even if Bellingcat's views and mission align with NATO and against Putin, Assad, et al, so what? We should take the word of murderous dictators instead, because the West is so evil?
kktkti9 5y ago
They are not anti-systemic The system will emit one system that will always align with our understanding of reality with constants we cannot violate. The perimeter is programmed; physics. All this modeling is filling in the middle. What it means as far as impact on human agency is up to politics as usual. This is more of the same “we have this streamlined math model, now what?” All these things are is confirmation math operators still work within our known bubble of physics. It’s mathematically true whether we define it or not. Some geometric art project is not a good basis for application of my agency. Biology science allows us to take the view the application of these ideas is chemical delusion. The cynical take is that managing human agency with models most cannot understand the meaning of is fascist. Go ahead and draw spirals on a wall all day. I don’t have to pick to politically empower people for it. You know what saves money and effort? Doing less and buying less. An economical solution that’s untenable or rich people would be normal.
wpietri 5y ago
If a database has been leaked enough to be widely available, isn't the effectively "open" in the OSINT sense?
deadalus 5y ago
US govt-sponsored website Bellingcat disrupts MH17 trial in Netherlands Source : https://thegrayzone.com/2021/01/02/bellingcat-disrupts-mh17-trial-netherlands/ https://thegrayzone.com/2021/01/02/bellingcat-disrupts-mh17-... ______________________________ Bellingcat fabricate evidence, deliberately hide documents in new ‘Russian spy plot’ Source : https://armswatch.com/exposed-bellingcat-fabricate-evidence-deliberately-hide-documents-in-new-russian-spy-plot/ https://armswatch.com/exposed-bellingcat-fabricate-evidence-... ______________________________ Bellingcat is funded by and works together with the UK government through the 'Institute for Statecraft' aka 'Integrity Initiative' Source : https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Bellingcat#Integrity_Initiative https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Bellingcat#Integrity_Initiative
- alwayseasy 5y ago
  TheGrayZone and wikispook are clearly known disinformation outlets.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - deadalus 5y ago
    "Disinformation" is just a fancy word people(in this case pro US-UK government propogandists) throw around to shut down people when they have no valid comeback.
    - 6510 5y ago
      The valid comeback would be that it is a very ugly process. At least out in the open we can have the parable of the blind men and an elephant.
  - bigbillheck 5y ago
    How does that differ from 'open-source intelligence'?
jacobwilliamroy 5y ago
Personally I think collaboration with a government is inevitable in order to get access to the kinds of resources and technology one needs to really cover one's butt on the internet. It seems like government sponsorship is necessary these days just to get a computer that hasn't already been backdoored.
- 6510 5y ago
  We switched from well funded journalists to platforms with guaranteed readership + extra promotion if a publication triggers the [platforms] desired emotional response.

mhh__ 5y ago

Personally I've never really been under the impression that bellingcat were strictly neutral, I mostly buy that they get tipped off and then rejustify the story using OSINT sometimes, but let's not forget that they have published information which is embarrassing to the US. See the recent story on procedures on nuclear bases leaking from flashcard apps for example.

mandmandam 5y ago
> they have published information which is embarrassing to the US Any examples that doesn't directly attack fossil fuel competitors?
- HDMI_Cable 5y ago
  > Any examples that doesn't directly attack fossil fuel competitors? No offence, but that is moving the goalposts a bit; information critical of the US is still critical of the US.
- mhh__ 5y ago
  Nuclear bombs not reactors

bishoprook2 5y ago

> their site definitely has a certain political orientation that usually tends to align with NATO interests, It seems to me that if a site presents any threat to the ruling class, you simply see your Paypal access disappear, VISA accounts go away, hosting goes away, ability to make a public case via FB/Twitter/etc. goes down the memory hole, 'kept' reporters attack you, MSM mobs you, so I'm not surprised. The last half decade has made the real game as plain as day.

mdp2021 5y ago

Pluralism of investigation may be preferable (to the public) to monopoly of investigation. The matter is still part of the problem of the crisis in journalism - the difficulties of financing in new market models, and the ease of compromises with powers, hinder investigative journalism. Even recognition of its core mandate as a value is in crisis.

bredren 5y ago

> where the information was not open source, relying on some leaked database of russian passports instead If the information Was reasonably obtainable by anyone, I would flag this as grey literature. That is OSINT.

IfOnlyYouKnew 5y ago

That mintpress site is shady af, from zero transparency into funding sources to the impossible-to-deny red flag of attributing stories to writers who immediately deny all involvement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MintPress_News https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MintPress_News And trying to triangulate the truth somewhere between them and Bellingcat works about as well as a Tesla trying to triangulate between the highway exit and continuing in its lane. As but one example: either Assad dropped chemical weapons on his citizens, or the rebels did. The former is supported by famous fans of US imperialism like the UN, Doctors’ without Borders, Amnesty, the EU. and the reality that Assad was generally known to posses those weapons and delivery capabilities. Taking the other side are Putin, Assad, and, probably, Glen Greenwald.

mandmandam 5y ago
I consider MPN far less shady than Fox, CBS, NBC, WaPo, or the NYT. It's really nice to have a news source that applies a modicum of skepticism to America's "foreign policy". From your link: > "BuzzFeed News in 2013 described the site as having "an agenda that lines up, from its sympathy with the Syrian regime to its hostility to Sunni Saudi Arabia, with that of the Islamic Republic of Iran." If we're talking about bias; how biased is it to claim that since MPN don't agree with regime change in Syria, and they don't go along with America's (twisted beyond belief) "friendliness" towards SA, they must be working for Iran? And, isn't it weird that the wiki page makes no attempt to link to any of MPN's responses to such claims? Looking over a recent one makes a lot of the claims made in your comment and in the linked wiki page look ridiculous - https://www.mintpressnews.com/a-biased-newsguard-honors-mintpress-with-red-rating-heres-our-point-by-point-response/258499/ https://www.mintpressnews.com/a-biased-newsguard-honors-mint...
- mrobot 5y ago
  Yes, i don't think people realize just how ruthlessly enforced alignment with US foreign policy goals is on Wikipedia. In matters of foreign governments and current events related to war, Wikipedia is essentially a propaganda page of the CIA. Very few editors control exercise real control over the foreign policy information on Wikipedia. It is not the democratic neutral source that people see it as, and that's part of why it's a good propaganda tool. It is kind of a Trojan horse into your trust boundaries. If you watch some of the edit wars when a big event happens in the news, you can often see very useful information (with sources) being thrown away. It's not really possible to get information on there that conflicts with the current military goals, because that would upset the mission.

toofy 5y ago

Regardless of your feelings on Bellingcat, none of that changes the fact that, us (the community) having access to more information and more tools at our disposal to analyze this information is a far better outcome than governments locking it away. It is quite literally—as the headline says, challenging the governments (and i’d toss in corporations as well) monopolies on certain types of information. Even if you don’t personally like Bellingcat, feed us more information, not less. The more information we have access to, the more difficult it is for authoritarian governments to run propaganda against us. Also, yeah, I think you may have been drastically understating when you mention mint being biased. There are surely sites which are critical of open source research institutes like Bellingcat that will have a far better track record than somewhere like mint who have had multiple bouts of absolutely bonkers and absurd propaganda for brutal dictators and brutal regimes. Of course they’re against OSINT. We need far more open source intelligence research not less.

mrobot 5y ago
Organizations like Bellingcat are really just sort of less-than-professional press outlets for the intelligence agencies. The information is controlled, the interpretation is biased because of spook affiliation at the highest levels, and they can be more sloppy than official government agencies with the information that is available to inject some narrative into public opinion without it actually being fact. They can wave off any harm they do. Some of these organizations make absolutely wild conclusions based on very limited info like looking up buildings on google earth and assuming they are some type of building, making some crazy conclusion like such and such number of prisoners somewhere. If you're worried about brutality, you might want to look up what US sanctions on Syria are actually doing to the people there. They can't eat. They have no heat. No gas. We are stealing their oil. Do you think the Syrian people might see us as an authoritarian government? Because they are suffering, we are causing it, there's nothing they can do, and the situation is enforced by violence.
- noduerme 5y ago
  Really? You can't draw some conclusions about the number of Uighur prisoners in Chinese camps, based on satellite evidence? Oh, right, they're Sunni. We shouldn't put sanctions on Assad when he drops barrel bombs on his own civilians? Oh, wait, they were Sunnis. Wikipedia is controlled by the US intelligence agencies? Don't make me laugh. You want pure Shia propaganda from Assad and the Ayatollah, trust MintPress. Even if Bellingcat's views and mission align with NATO and against Putin, Assad, et al, so what? We should take the word of murderous dictators instead, because the West is so evil?

kktkti9 5y ago

They are not anti-systemic The system will emit one system that will always align with our understanding of reality with constants we cannot violate. The perimeter is programmed; physics. All this modeling is filling in the middle. What it means as far as impact on human agency is up to politics as usual. This is more of the same “we have this streamlined math model, now what?” All these things are is confirmation math operators still work within our known bubble of physics. It’s mathematically true whether we define it or not. Some geometric art project is not a good basis for application of my agency. Biology science allows us to take the view the application of these ideas is chemical delusion. The cynical take is that managing human agency with models most cannot understand the meaning of is fascist. Go ahead and draw spirals on a wall all day. I don’t have to pick to politically empower people for it. You know what saves money and effort? Doing less and buying less. An economical solution that’s untenable or rich people would be normal.

wpietri 5y ago

If a database has been leaked enough to be widely available, isn't the effectively "open" in the OSINT sense?

deadalus 5y ago

US govt-sponsored website Bellingcat disrupts MH17 trial in Netherlands Source : https://thegrayzone.com/2021/01/02/bellingcat-disrupts-mh17-trial-netherlands/ https://thegrayzone.com/2021/01/02/bellingcat-disrupts-mh17-... ______________________________ Bellingcat fabricate evidence, deliberately hide documents in new ‘Russian spy plot’ Source : https://armswatch.com/exposed-bellingcat-fabricate-evidence-deliberately-hide-documents-in-new-russian-spy-plot/ https://armswatch.com/exposed-bellingcat-fabricate-evidence-... ______________________________ Bellingcat is funded by and works together with the UK government through the 'Institute for Statecraft' aka 'Integrity Initiative' Source : https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Bellingcat#Integrity_Initiative https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Bellingcat#Integrity_Initiative

alwayseasy 5y ago
TheGrayZone and wikispook are clearly known disinformation outlets.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deadalus 5y ago
  "Disinformation" is just a fancy word people(in this case pro US-UK government propogandists) throw around to shut down people when they have no valid comeback.
  - 6510 5y ago
    The valid comeback would be that it is a very ugly process. At least out in the open we can have the parable of the blind men and an elephant.
- bigbillheck 5y ago
  How does that differ from 'open-source intelligence'?

jacobwilliamroy 5y ago

Personally I think collaboration with a government is inevitable in order to get access to the kinds of resources and technology one needs to really cover one's butt on the internet. It seems like government sponsorship is necessary these days just to get a computer that hasn't already been backdoored.

6510 5y ago
We switched from well funded journalists to platforms with guaranteed readership + extra promotion if a publication triggers the [platforms] desired emotional response.