PSYOPS against Venezuela ?

[DC]

Except the first responders could not do that. read the report. especiually the recommendations. It needs to be special forensic software. They did not know they needed Interpol until after they saw what was on the PC. Do you even read your own links?

It is still allowable in a court of law.

I contribute enough to this thread that you had to snip out most of my post because you could not answer it.

they did not know?

why didnt uribe go to the International Court like he said he will?
making some headlines is all? mmhhhh strange strange.

it will never be accepted in front of the court. the international regocnized way of collecting digital evidence was not followed.

 

[DC]

Show us them then. You are a blatant hypocrite. You use biased media and then call us out for it.

can we use the BBC?

you can use whatever you want, just dont fall for the lies there.

i also use the biased western media.

 

[funk de fino]

they did not know?

No, the first responders did not know. The correct police unit did know later and had the software and made the images, then Interpol came. Please read your own links. That is why Interpol said they had to give recommendations to all its members regarding this in future.

The procedures used by the Colombian Judicial Police for recording, documenting, photographing and labelling, imaging and copying each of the exhibits were found by INTERPOL’s experts to conform to internationally recognized principles for the handling of electronic evidence by law enforcement, thus ensuring that none of the data contained in the seized exhibits had been altered, damaged or destroyed during the handling of the evidence.

why didnt uribe go to the International Court like he said he will?
making some headlines is all? mmhhhh strange strange.

Nothing to do with me. Dodge ball again?

it will never be accepted in front of the court. the international regocnized way of collecting digital evidence was not followed.

Again you did not even read your own link.

When law enforcement directly accesses seized electronic evidence without first making physical images of the data, such access leaves traces of the relevant law enforcement officer’s accessing and viewing of the evidence. Direct access may complicate validating this evidence for purposes of its introduction in a judicial proceeding, because law enforcement is then required to demonstrate or prove that the direct access did not have a material impact on the purpose for which the evidence is intended.

That does not say it would not be accepted, it says it would make it more difficult. You have made a false claim again.

Recommendation 1: Enhanced training for first-responder police units encountering electronic evidence during criminal investigations.
100. It is widely accepted as a problem within police forces around the world that first-responder police units – the law enforcement officers who first find the electronic evidence – do not as a general rule have adequate training with regard to how to handle and access electronic evidence contained in computers and electronic data storage devices.

Please link to the german study you mentioned earlier.

 

[funk de fino]

you can use whatever you want, just dont fall for the lies there.

i also use the biased western media.

Evidence of critical pieces on that website yet?

I thought the BBC were fair and impartial as yu can get?

 

[DC]

the problem is not the pictures etc they took lol. its about acced to the evidence that is not OK, they would have need to copy it first, and acces it on the copy....

its not about picture, its about images, a ghost image.....

 

[Beerina]

what is the purpose of that map/list?

You tell me. You're the one who's the first to say "it was just an aspirin factory!"

 

[dudalb]

says the man who always links to this

www.venezuelanalysis.com

Its too funny.

IF it agrees with my ideology, it factual information.
If it disagrees with my ideology it's evil propaganda.
The inability of ideologues to recognize propaganda and biased information when it agrees with them is incredible.

 

[dudalb]

"Biased Western Media" like the BBC????
It's hopeless. Comrade Cheney will echo the Neo Marxist party line no matter what.

 

[theprestige]

thanks , very interesting.

Do you guys also have specialists that can upload full data images to laptops , memorysticks and external harddrives?
Would this also belong to the kind of operations done by your group?

Um... No.

PSYOP missions generally consist of some combination of:

1. Radio and TV broadcasts, advising civilians and soldiers of risks they should avoid, aid they might receive, and procedures for making contact with your own forces in a safe and peaceful way.

2. Leaflet drops and loudspeaker broadcasts, encouraging enemy soldiers to desert, surrender, malinger, or otherwise stop contributing to their war effort.

3. Patrolling civilian areas, smiling, shaking hands, and passing out candy, water, medical supplies, etc. Basically showing the "kinder, gentler" face of the U.S. military.

4. Providing linguists and cultural analysts to support Civil Affairs and Engineer units conducting "nation-building" operations.

Planting evidence of enemy operations, strategies, etc. is so far outside the PSYOP mission that your question isn't even wrong. It's just... silly.

 

[Skeptic]

It's interesting to see those who scream the loudest about how the USA is a "dictatorship" that "destroys freedom of speech" have no trouble believing conspiracy theories by the tin pot dictator du jour about how all opposition to him is all a nefarious USA plot, so it is perfectly acceptable for him to silence them by force.

They either really believe that, in which case they're idiots, or they don't but just post it to have some horse manure to fling at the USA, in which case they're liars.

 

[funk de fino]

the problem is not the pictures etc they took lol. its about acced to the evidence that is not OK, they would have need to copy it first, and acces it on the copy....

its not about picture, its about images, a ghost image.....

I know what ghost images are and the Colombian Juidicial Police Team took those images. I am not talking about photos, you are making another strawman. Made the images does not mean taking photos. Once again your english is letting you down. I know what making images is as I used to do it all the time using Ghost. Unfortunately the first responders did not know they were not supposed to boot up the PC's first. It was only after they booted them up they realised they might need Interpol.

They booted up the PC but Interpol do not say it cannot be used in court but it would be more difficult. Your claim was false.

it will never be accepted in front of the court

Fail again. Try reading your own links before making a fool of yourself.

The procedures used by the Colombian Judicial Police for recording, documenting, photographing and labelling, imaging (29) and copying each of the exhibits were found by INTERPOL’s experts to conform to internationally recognized principles for the handling of electronic evidence by law enforcement, thus ensuring that none of the data contained in the seized exhibits had been altered, damaged or destroyed during the handling of the evidence.

Note 29 - For an explanation of forensic imaging, see page 18.

Try again. Another epic fail. Its even worse when its your own source.

ETA - Tha fact you had a "lol" in there makes it even more funny that you stuck your size nine right in your own gob.

 

[DC]

OK lets asume the Colombian authoritys did everything right with the evidence. They didnt, but lets asume it.

What is the Evidence?
Did anyone of you read those mails? Did anyone see those Documents?

If they have evidence, why dont they go to the International court in Den Haag, like Uribe said?

 

[funk de fino]

OK lets asume the Colombian authoritys did everything right with the evidence. They didnt, but lets asume it.

Is that you admitting you made false claims amd mistook photos for images?

The Colombians did make ghost imgaes. The evidence can be used in court.

What is the Evidence?
Did anyone of you read those mails? Did anyone see those Documents?

If they have evidence, why dont they go to the International court in Den Haag, like Uribe said?

Ask them. I cannot tell you that. You are trying to move away from your false claims about the Interpol investigation.

 

[DC]

Is that you admitting you made false claims amd mistook photos for images?

The Colombians did make ghost imgaes. The evidence can be used in court.



Ask them. I cannot tell you that. You are trying to move away from your false claims about the Interpol investigation.

no. the "evidence" is useless.

Finding 2b: Access to the data contained in the eight FARC computer exhibits
between 1 March 2008, when they were seized by Colombian authorities, and 3 March
2008 at 11:45 a.m., when they were turned over to the Grupo Investigativo de Delitos
Informáticos of the Colombian Judicial Police, did not conform to internationally
recognized principles for handling electronic evidence by law enforcement.

but anyway, lets asume the evidence will be accepted anyway.

what is the evidence?
what did the mail exactly say?

and why didnt Uribe go to the International Court like he said he will?
I guess he willl not make youtube videos and sell that evidence on DVD's.

 

[funk de fino]

no. the "evidence" is useless.

That is a lie, I have shown you this in Interpols own report. It can be accepted in court but it is more difficult for the police to prove that the findings are true. It is not useless. You said it could not be accepted.

it will never be accepted in front of the court

Incorrect, Interpol know better than you I'm afraid.

You got it wrong about the images also eh? Why is it so difficult to say "I was wrong"

but anyway, lets asume the evidence will be accepted anyway.

what is the evidence?
what did the mail exactly say?

and why didnt Uribe go to the International Court like he said he will?
I guess he willl not make youtube videos and sell that evidence on DVD's.

I think you are forgetting that it is someone elase you are disputing this with not me. Stop dodging away from this point.

How should I or anyone know what Uribe would, should or could do?

 

[funk de fino]

Direct access may complicate validating this evidence for purposes of its introduction in a judicial proceeding, because law enforcement is then required to demonstrate or prove that the direct access did not have a material impact on the purpose for which the evidence is intended.

read this, it does not say it cannot be accepted or useless.

It states that it makes it more complicated. If the police can prove it, then it can be used.

 

[DC]

That is a lie, I have shown you this in Interpols own report. It can be accepted in court but it is more difficult for the police to prove that the findings are true. It is not useless. You said it could not be accepted.



Incorrect, Interpol know better than you I'm afraid.

You got it wrong about the images also eh? Why is it so difficult to say "I was wrong"



I think you are forgetting that it is someone elase you are disputing this with not me. Stop dodging away from this point.

How should I or anyone know what Uribe would, should or could do?

But are you convinced by the evidence`?
Did you see that evidence?

 

[DC]

read this, it does not say it cannot be accepted or useless.

It states that it makes it more complicated. If the police can prove it, then it can be used.

ok lets asume they are able to prove that the evidence is undoctored.

what is the evidence?

 

[funk de fino]

But are you convinced by the evidence`?
Did you see that evidence?

You got it wrong about the images also eh? Why is it so difficult to say "I was wrong"

 

[funk de fino]

ok lets asume they are able to prove that the evidence is undoctored.

what is the evidence?

Why is it so difficult to say "I was wrong"